Talk:Valencia Fallas

Unencyclopedic tone

The article sounds more like a tourist advertisement than an objective description. I admire the author's passion for the subject and I don't doubt how fun the whole event is, but this needs to be reflected objectively rather than "...You'll be lying in bed trying to recover from last night's partying when it starts..."

I couldn´t agree more. I felt embarassed when I read that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.202.96.146 (talk) 10:00, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

-Nevertheless, I am Spanish myself, and I agree completely with the text and the writer. I think that the emphasis and the details given are exactly the ones that should be transmited to those that are looking for information about Fallas. I have gone to each one every year since I was 4, and I can tell from experience that, the feeling of being awaken at 8 a.m. by incredibly loud explosions and the car alarms, after a long night of partying, will stay written on your memory for ever. All, from the smell of the black powder while you are walking through Valencia, to the beautifully constructed marvels, and of course the deliciously prepared Paella, has to be explained with all of those feelings for the curious reader to get the grasp of this amazing event. It is true that the tone and some quotes make this article somewhat different from a common encyclopedia, and make it sound a bit informal, however, I am sure that this is really how Spanish Culture should be seen by outsiders.

• Alexander89 01:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

¿Com la cultura espanyola deuría ser vista pels forasters? ¿I si simplement se la describim i ja ells decideixen com la volen vore? Aço es una enciclopedía no un follet publicitari 77.231.185.162 (talk) 23:56, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

--I agree with the text, but some of the parenthesis need to be removed, eg. Huge crowds gather from all corners of the city to see this event (go early!). That's some of what contributes to the unencyclopedic tone. Esk3 (talk) 21:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Catalan countries don't exist

The user CNoguera don't like the reality. There is nothing call catalan countries and of course Valencian countrie is not a part of them. Thus falles couldn't be a catalan tradition. Moreover is not useful, for example,a FCBarcelona link in this page. I will delete this stupid table allways I see it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.203.138.133 (talk) 11:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Dear anon user, for a long time a bunch of users involved in the development and maintenance of this and related articles have thought that it would be useful to have such a template to help navigation between them. Notice that it is explicitly about a "Catalan-Valencian cultural domain". There is no claim of any political existance for a so-called "Catalan Countries", which is what you probably have in mind when you say that they do not exist. I kindly invite you to elaborate your point of view, if you deem it necessary, taking this into account and avoiding personal attacks and derogative terms as, unfortunately, you have done in the previous message. Cheers, --Carles Noguera (talk) 17:04, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I thought that after two weeks you don't want to try again to put this crazy and not-useful table, but I was wrong. It doesn't exists anything called Catalan-Valencian cultural domain, and for that reason this table is so stupid. It's very simple, language and culture are not equals, so valencian culture is not catalan culture. And you lie when yo say there is not claim of any political existance for a so-called Catalan Countries because in the geo-political divisions of the table says "All the above territories together: Països Catalans". Finally as I sayd before, the Barcelona FC article is very related with falles, of course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.203.136.154 (talk) 22:19, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Although you keep on using derogative terms and a general somewhat unfriendly tone, discussions about any aspect of an article can help improving it so I'll try to make point clearer. I think that your complaint would be justified if the template would claim that the so-called "Catalan Countries" form a political entity which, as we all know, is not true. But, on the contrary, such a concept only appears under the label "geo-political divisions", i.e. in a set allowing both political entities and purely geographical ones. The Catalan Countries are just the geographical area where Catalan is, and has been, traditionally spoken, or it has some kind of official status. That's all. On the other hand, the template is intended to be culturally minded, helping users to navigate between important articles corresponding to several items of the Catalan-Valencian cultural domain. Such a domain is not an invention of any wikipedian, as you seem to suggest, but a concept widely used by academic sources and a number of cultural associations and hence it must be reflected in the neutral free encyclopedia we are trying to build here. As relevant examples I invite to take a look at cultural institutions such as Ramon Llull Foundation or Joan Lluís Vives Institute, or reference books such as AMADES, Joan. Costumari Català. El curs de l'any. Salvat Editores i Edicions 62. Barcelona. 1983 ISBN: 84-345-3673-0, THIBAUT I COMALADA, Eliana, "La cuina dels Països Catalans, reflex d'una societat", Editorial Pòrtic, 2001, ISBN 978-84-7306-716-4, or Riquer, Martí de. Història de la literatura catalana. 6 vols. Barcelona: Editorial Ariel, 1980, or Terry, Arthur. A Companion to Catalan Literature. Woodbridge, Suffolk, U.K. / Rochester, N.Y.: Tamesis, 2003.. You will see that these institutions and sources choose the linguistical domain of Catalan-Valencian as a reasonable framework to carry out purely cultural promotion and studies. --Carles Noguera (talk) 06:10, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not using a derogative terms and a general somewhat unfriendly tone, at least not more than the derogative term for valencian people that is Catalan Countries. Valencian people is not catalan and not want to be catalan, please understand it. The catalan countries is an invented term that only has one meaning: pancatalan nathionalism. When you use it you insult valencian people. Only 0'5% of the valencian people vote political parties that agree your ideology so respect the other 99'5%. Anyway I tell you again that this table disturb the navigation only to tell us that the Barça is a valencian tradition very related with the falles, very useful, of course.--81.203.131.220 (talk) 22:10, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

According to Merriam-Webster derogate means: "to cause to seem inferior", which can be probably applied to some words you used above (e.g. crazy and stupid) regarding to the consensual template you do not like. On the contrary, it is strange to apply such a definition to the expression Catalan-Valencian cultural domain where there are two parts constituting together a cultural domain, in an equal ground where none of them is inferior to the other. We should stick to the normal wikipedia procedures to build, keep and revise consensus (see WP:Consensus). Here the situation is the following: a bunch of editors coming from various points of view have agreed in using a template in several articles trying to achieve a neutral point of view (see WP:NPOV) and help navigation between them. Such consensus has lasted for a long time. Now you arrive and you want to revise it, which is something completely fine but must be done strictly following the rules. You've been bold and have erased the template from three articles. Then I have shown my opposition by providing some rationale in this talk page; so we have reached the point where, instead of engaging in an edit war, we should politely discuss about it and reach an agreement. I have offered my reasons to defend the current consensus supported by many sources. But, so far, instead of contesting them, you are deviating the debate to a political direction, which is out of place in cultural articles, and keep edit-warrying. I am trying to make you understand that this is only about culture, and we should clearly separate it from politics. I am only pointing at cultural institutions, books and scholars, but you reply talking about political parties, political ideologies and results in elections, a reply which I really fail to see in what sense can challenge my rationale. So, I invite you to make your point clearer and explain exactly what is wrong with the evidence I have brought into debate. --Carles Noguera (talk) 12:47, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

When you say that valencian culture is only a part of catalan culture you are trying to show everybody that valencian society is inferior to catalan. The culture is not only the language. There are parts of valencian country that don't speak catalan, do they have also catalan culture? they don't have culture at all? I know you don't like it, but the culture of Sagunt is basically the same than the culture from Segorbe, but the people there speaks diferents languages. Don't lie because I have deleted this no-sense table after more than two months talking about it, not deleted it and then you have shown my opposition by providing some rationale in this talk page. This table only wants to show your particular politic view, not cultural, because it doesn't show one culture. Why is falles more related whith Gaudí, Barça or IEC than with other world-known valencian festivals as tomatina or the Entrada de toros y caballos from Segorbe? I think you agree with this point of view only because you have a politic background--80.36.142.24 (talk) 17:02, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

You keep insisting on politics, but this is out of place. We are (or should be) talking about culture: falles and other popular traditions, painters, architecture, language, etc., because you are right: culture encompasses and it is much more than language. You think that, for instance, tomatina is a very relevant issue missing there? No problem, we can add it, as we did it in the past with other important items. Nobody is trying to imply that valencian society is inferior to catalan; this would make no sense at all and I would be the first one to be offended (even for personal reasons) if somebody would suggest such a stupid thing. Please, notice what I have said above, which is the exact opposite of that: "there are two parts constituting together a cultural domain, in an equal ground where none of them is inferior to the other". Could I make it clearer? Now, in order to reconduct a discussion that otherwise could become frustrating and useless, let me pose you several simple questions which I kindly ask you to address one by one:

• Do you accept to follow strictly Wikipedia rules to solve this particular conflict? Notice that this implies that changes aiming to revise a previous consensus that meet some opposition must lead to a discussion to seek for a new consensus.
• If yes, do you admit that the two of us have never reached a new consensus in this talk page to erase the table?
• Do you agree that cultural institutions such as Ramon Llull Foundation or Joan Lluís Vives Institute choose the Catalan-Valencian domain to conduct their promotional activities?
• Do you agree that there are dozens of academic sources (such as those I have cited above by Amades, Thibaut i Comalat, de Riquer, and Terry) that choose the same domain to conduct purely cultural studies?

Cheers. --Carles Noguera (talk) 17:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't you see that you say that valencian country is not good enough to have a own an independent culture is saying that is inferior than catalan culture? (or if you want inferior than this suposed catalan-valencian culture). There are a lot of differences to determine a valencian culture and a catalan culture and is not needed to mix them.

• Of course I follow the strictly Wikipedia rules to solve this particular conflict. I don't know where is the previous consensus to use this table? Please show it to me, where are all the discusions about it?
• Ramon Llul Foundation is not participied by Generalitat Valenciana, so maybe they don't havce this universal consensus you have. And Joan Lluís Vives Institute is a network of catalan-language universities, not anything more.
• Do you really think that Thibaut i Comalada is an academic source? She wrote a book called "La cuina dels Països Catalans, reflex d'una societat", I think is hard to be a society when 99% of valencian people have never been in Comalada original region (Rousillon). Anyway, there are thousends of books that analyze valencian cuisine (and traditions, music, festivals, society, history...) in a separate way than catalan--77.211.240.159 (talk) 15:55, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I have to admit (as Cnoguera already knows...) that Mr.Anon-User does have a point here. I have always argued there is no reason to include Cataluña-Valencia in the same infobox. It would be like including Murcia-Alicante or Murcia-Almeria. Valencia and Catalunya have common ground and similiarities, but I don't believe an Catalan-Valencian culture box should exist. I carry on saying that it makes the same sense as a Madrid-Guadalajara. I can Put my hand in the fire and go as far as saying that Madrid&Guadalajara have more in common than Valencia-Catalunya. Think of the traditions and you will see that they have more differences than many other neighbours in Spain. Ahi queda eso.--Arthurbrown (talk) 18:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, first let me answer the points you both have raised and then I'll try to bring some more evidence to mine.

• Good to know that everybody agrees with wikipolicies. In particular we agree with WP:Sources that enforces us to provide sources to check the verifiability of contents and WP:Verifiability that reminds us that The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth, that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Our personal opinion does not matter, only what we can find in sources. So it is not up to us to discuss whether something could make somebody think that something is superior or inferior to something else. We are only expected to collect information from reliable sources and formulate it in a rigorous way in our articles.
• The Generalitat Valenciana does not belong to Ramon Llull Institute, although it was invited to join it, and it was even asked by Valencian parties in the Valencian Parlament to do so. However, some Valencian cities do belong to the Ramon Llull Foundation (see [1]).
• The Joan Lluís Vives Institute is a network of universities from all the Catalan linguistic domain, headquartered in Castelló de la Plana and hence it includes Valencian universities: University of Alicante, Miguel Hernández University of Elche, University of Valencia, James I University, and Polytechnic University of Valencia (see [2]). The institution defines itself in the following way: The Vives Network is an association of universities that strengthens the ties among the universities of Catalonia, Valencian Community, Balearic Islands, southern France and Andorra as well as other territories with strong cultural, geographical, historical and linguistic bonds. The aim is to create a university network that makes possible the coordination of teaching, research and cultural activities, as well as the promotion and normalisation of the Catalan language. And it declares as a common value: Linguistic unity of the different members of the university community with cultural, geographical, historical and linguistic bonds (see [3]). So they choose this domain not only as a linguistic one, but also as cultural domain.
• I confess I do not understand the reasoning about 99% of Valencians not having travelled to Roussillon. Do we have such an statistics or was it only a rethorical point? And, in any case, if this would be true, what would it prove? Would it prove that the source is wrong? Would it prove that the alleged society is not really such? But, then, if for instance we would know that 99% of Valencians have never visited El Pinós, should we conclude that its inhabitants do not belong to Valencian society?
• Arthur Brown informs us that Madrid and Guadalajara may have greater cultural similarities than Catalonia and Valencia. I have no doubts about it for both regions are populated by Castilian people and thus belong to the area of Castilian culture, already since the times of the Kingdom of Castile. But, in what sense does it contradict my points? As far as I can see you are just bringing up another example that bears many similarities with the present one.

Finally, I would like to add a new source to complement the previous ones. So far, I have mentioned examples of cultural institutions explicitly choosing the Catalan-Valencian cultural domain as their framework, and sources written by authors from several regions of this domain doing the same and even one by an anglophone author. Now I want to draw your attention to this. As you can see it is a document issued by the Royal Spanish Academy, needless to say a world-wide respected cultural institution, and the official academy that regulates Spanish language. The document is a reaction to certain political tensions during Spanish transition to democracy affecting the nature of languages and cultural communities in Spain and it was signed by such personalities as Camilo José Cela, Dámaso Alonso, Antonio Buero Vallejo and many others. It claims the unity of Catalan language in the several territories where it is spoken, and it ends with this paragraph: Es culturalmente aberrante todo intento —como el que contemplamos— de desmembrar el País Valenciano de la comunidad idiomática y cultural catalana, por la que, como escritores e intelectuales españoles, no tenemos sino respeto y admiración, dentro de la cual el País Valenciano ha tenido y tiene un lugar tan relevante (my translation: Any attempt, as the one we can see now, to separate the Valencian Country from the linguistic and cultural Catalan community (towards which we, as Spanish writers and intellectuals, feel respect and admiration, and inside which the Valencian Country has and has had a very relevant role) would be culturally aberrant.)--Carles Noguera (talk) 15:47, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm also happy that you agree the WP:Sources. So you must accept finally the reality. First of all, as you said the Joan Lluis Vives network say that there are strong bonds between catalan culture and valencian culture, but they don't say both of them are one unique culture. I have never said that catalan and valencian culture hadn't strong bonds, I have only say they aren't the same culture. You mentioned too Institut Ramon Llull. As you could read in their statutes they task is Promoure l’ensenyament del català i de la cultura que s’hi expressa (promote instruction of catalan language and culture expressed in catalan), but they separate language and culture. About Thibaut i Comalada is very simple, I'm sure you have understand it. Only when people have a pancatalanistic ideology could think that Valencia and Rousillon are one society, because the differences are really bigs (basically that only about the 8% of rousillon people share a language with a 30% of valencian people, what can we do with valencian castillian-speaker people and rousillon french-speaking people? do they have they own society separate of the catalan-speaking people? Finally if you want you could visit the preamble of the Statute of Autonomy of the Valencian Comunity there youd could read Once the Spanish Constitution was passed, it was within this framework where the Valencian tradition stemming from the historical Kingdom of Valencia met the modern conception of the Land of Valencia and gave rise to Valencian autonomy, integrating the two currents of opinion that encompass everything that is Valencian in its own cultural concept within the strict geographical limits that autonomy sets out. This law was aproved for more of the 90% of valencian people and sey textually own cultural concept.--95.60.10.148 (talk) 21:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Dear anonymous user, thanks again for your remarks. I'd like to reply about several things. The statement of an own cultural concept in the Valencian statute does not prevent scholars from performing studies where Valencian culture might be seen inside a wider framework. Actually, according to WP:Sources, the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers, so all I can do is to insist in the academic sources I have already provided and maybe, if you want, to add as many as you want. For instance:

• Antoni M. Badia i Margarit. Llengua i cultura als Països Catalans, El Cangur 16, Edicions 62, 1993. (about language and culture in the Catalan Countries)
• Borja de Riquer i Permanyer (ed.). Història, política, societat i cultura dels Països Catalans, Enciclopèdia Catalana, 1996. (History, politics, society and culture in the Catalan Countries, in 13 volumes)
• Joan-Lluís Lluís, Diccionari dels llocs imaginaris dels Països Catalans, RBA, 2006. (about imaginary places in myths and legends in popular culture from the Catalan Countries)

On the other hand, the statements by the relevant cultural institutions (Ramon Llull Institute, Vives Network and Royal Spanish Academy RAE) are very clear, although you seem to like to deny them. Nobody claims that the culture of one place is exactly equal than that of another place (this would not even be the case if you would compare two regions inside the Valencian Community, right? Or would you say that the culture in Alcoià is exactly equal to that in Plana Alta?). Those institutions just claim a usual working assumption in the academic world: those territories under the label Catalan Countries share some traits (probably none of them being essential, remember Wittgenstein's family resemblances) that make it reasonable to take them as a framework for cultural studies and promotional activities. Observe that not even the language is an essential element for it is encompassed by culture but does not exhaust it. Isn't the statement by RAE clear enough? In the aforementioned paragraph they say that it would be culturally aberrant to separate the Valencian Country from the cultural Catalan community.

Well, I think I've made my point quite clear, but should you have any further doubts or remarks about it, don't you hesitate to express them here. Cheers. --Carles Noguera (talk) 15:31, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you want academic sources? Don't worry I give them to you, oh wait, there aren't academic sources!!! If you visit the webpages of the valencian public universities (sorr I haven't found it for Miguel Hernández University) Valencian University, Valencian Polithecnical University (you have to write Països Catalans in the Por palabras del título box), Alicante University (you must write it again) and Jaume I University from Castelló you only found five books refering to this important and son consensuated cultural framework. And two of them are the same book ( La ciència en la Història dels Països Catalans.

Of course if you want to live in your invented, catalan and fantastic world you can still say that Ramon Llull don't defend that catalan and valencian culture are the same although they say in their own website that they protect catalan language and culture expressed in catalan, nor catalan culture.--95.60.10.148 (talk) 12:01, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your bibliographical research. Now we can add a few more sources proving that Catalan Countries are used as framework for cultural studies in the literature:

• Vicenç M. Rosselló i Verger, Cartografia històrica dels Països Catalans, Publicacions de la Universitat de València, 2008. (on historical cartography of the Catalan Countries)
• Joan Vernet, Ramon Parés (eds.), La ciència en la Història dels Països Catalans, Publicacions de la Universitat de València, 2004. (on science in the history of the Catalan Countries, in two volumes)
• Pelai Pagès i Blanch (ed.), La Guerra Civil als Països Catalans (1936-1939), Publicacions de la Universitat de València, 2007. (on the Spanish Civil War in the Catalan Countries)
• Pelai Pagès i Blanch (ed.), La transició democràtica als Països Catalans, Publicacions de la Universitat de València, 2005. (on the transition to democracy in the Catalan Countries)

But, what is it exactly that you were trying to prove by this? You have not searched in the libraries of these universities, but in the catalogue of their own publications. And you have found a number of books about the Catalan Countries published by the University of Valencia. Fine. Do you try to infer that this number is small and, hence, this notion is not relevant? If this reasoning would be sound, then many important concepts would not be relevant only because Valencian universities have published a small amount of books including them in the title (!). Anyway, I thank you because your additional evidence with these four sources which I didn't know spreads more light on the topic.

As for the Ramon Llull institute and foundation, check a couple of pages on their official site: this and other pages in the culture section. Here it becomes quite clear what they understand by culture in the Catalan-Valencian domain. They consider not only literature and other forms of arts which are linguistical presented, but also any other cultural expression (photography, music, dance, circus, traditions, architecture, cuisine, painting, sculpture, etc.). Observe the very illustrative section on traditions. They deal with traditions from all over the Catalan Countries, including falles, moors and christians, etc. This is due to a fairly obvious fact that I have already stated above: language is encompassed by culture but does not exhaust it.--Carles Noguera (talk) 14:10, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Of course I infer that four is a small number of books if catalan countries were a normal framework for Valencian Unversity. Moreover if you search about books with País Valencià in the title (of course,if the title of the book is Análisis de circuitos we have to understand that it refers to circuit analisys in catalan countries) there are 27 books, and if you search España/Espanya you find 59 and 6 books, but of course, the common framework in valencian university are catalan countries. But, besides there are some books like Europa, Espanya, País Valencià or Economía espanyola i del País Valencià that prove that catalan countries are not the common framework for this university.

On the other hand, you use the traditions to say that there are a common culture, but you are wrong, as allways. Moros y Cristianos are ver common in Valencian Country Murcia, and Castilla la Mancha , but not in Catalonia. Bull partys are common in Valencia, Aragón, Castilla, and many other places, but catalan political parties want to ban them. Falles are typical from Valencia city and surroundings, and Hogueras (very similar) are from Alicante, but not in Catalonia. Castells are common in Catalonia, Algemesí and Titaguas, both of them valencian towns although one of them speaks valencian and the other castilian. Yes of course is due to all of us are catalan and we have catalan culture :-D--95.60.10.148 (talk) 13:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

If you would like to infer this, searching for books including "Països Catalans" in the title would not be enough, for there could be many references working in this context without explicitly mentioning it in the title by this name. And actually there are. First, of course, all publications dealing with the language are based on the fundamental assumption of its unity across the Valencian-Catalan domain. See, for instance::

• Antoni M. Badia i Margarit. Apologia i vindicació de la llengua catalana, Publicacions de la Universitat de València, 2004.
• Francesc de Borja Moll. Gramàtica històrica catalana, Publicacions de la Universitat de València, 2006.
• Manuel Pérez Saldanya. Del llatí al català. Morfosintaxi verbal històrica, Publicacions de la Universitat de València, 1998.

And not only linguistical works focus on this domain (although not writing "Països Catalans" in the title), for instance we have:

• Joan F. Mira, Francesc Fenollosa, Gustau Muñoz, Rosa Serrano, Vicenç Villatoro. Quina cultura?, Quaderns d'orientació valencianista, Publicacions de la Universitat de València, Editorial Afers, Edicions Bromera, Edicions 3 i 4, Tàndem Edicions, 2001. (reflections on culture in the Catalan Countries)
• Alfons Cucó, Ramon Lapiedra, Pere Mayor, Pasqual Mollà, Vicent Soler. Quin espai nacional, quin espai polític?, Quaderns d'orientació valencianista, Publicacions de la Universitat de València, Editorial Afers, Edicions Bromera, Edicions 3 i 4, Tàndem Edicions, 2001. (reflections on the national problem in Valencia and its relation to other Catalan-speaking territories)
• Giacomo Casanova, De Sagunt a Perpinyà, Publicacions de la Universitat de València, 2005. (personal diaries of the author describing his experience in the Catalan Countries in the 18th century).

On the other hand, I am not using traditions to prove that there is a common culture (what I can prove about reality is completely irrelevant here, for it would be original research), Institut Ramon Llull does consider traditions as a part of what they (together with dozens of sources as those we are citing) consider a common culture, not me. And, again, this is the only thing that matters here: sources.

This discussion cannot go on forever. You have erased, several times, a template that was there thanks to a previous consensus among editors. You have found my opposition in this talk page and, in spite of that and circumventing normal procedures, you have not allowed to restore it until a new consensus is reached. I have tolerated this irregularity, trying to assume good faith in you, and engaged in this long discussion hoping that it would bring interesting insight in the topic and, eventually, an understanding between the two of us and any other editor interested in the topic. But now I am starting to have the feeling that you might want to keep on discussing endlessly and refusing to get the point. I might be wrong about that (I hope), but your systematic denial of the following two facts on sources makes me worried:

• The Catalan-Valencian cultural domain is the framework for many kinds of cultural studies in dozens of academic sources, including books published by Valencian universities. Many examples are already listed in this page.
• This domain is also used as a framework for cultural promotion by public institutions, being relevant examples the Ramon Llull Foundation and Institute and the Vives network of universities (headquartered in a Valencian city). The validity of such framework has been advocated by the Royal Spanish Academy as well.

You have the names of the publications and several links to check it all.--Carles Noguera (talk) 16:27, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Try understand it, it's no so hard culture is not language so this books published by UV you mentioned abouta catalan language don't prove that Valencian and Catalan have the same culture, because if they did it you could talk too, about how english culture in Texas, Jamaica, South Africa or Hong-Kong. You mentioned too Casanova's book. Ok, he travelled from Sagunt to Perpignan, but has he said we have the same culture? If he didn't I supose you have infered it, so you could infer too that almost half Africa have the same culture because David Livingstone travelled across this continent.

Please don't try to make a charade: Institut Ramon Llull' is a public instituions but it's created by Catalan and Baleear government, nor valencian and Joan LLuis Vives Network is created by public and privates (like Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Universitat de Vic or Open University of Catalonia. If you want to know waht opine public institutions please visit Consell Valencià de Cultura] or Institut Alfons el Maganim].

Here, the main point you don't want to admit is that this supposed Catalan-Valencian culture domain is only used by people with a pancatalanistic ideology and there are much more books that talk about Valencian culture wihtout considering it as a part of catalan culture than the books that do it.

Finally, about the consensus, I know that before this table there were also a consensus you (or the one who created this aberrant table) broke, so I think is not a problem to get a real consensus. Moreover if you read that discussion you could check that is only about the name of the table, not the hole table, and it finish with a sarcastic tense from Mountolive:being the Valencian Community the other major (and rival) element in this Holy Països Catalans Trinity so it's posible that the one who has a disruptive attitude could be you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.126.149.8 (talk) 00:08, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, let me again reply to the points you are raising, solve some misunderstandings and provide some new evidence:

• You claim that culture is not language. Good. At least we have a complete agreement in a fundamental point. I have claimed it myself already several times in this very discussion: language is a part of culture, essential and very important if you want, but it does not exhaust it. In culture there is much more than language. That is why the institutions and sources I am providing all the time do not focus solely on language but in culture as a whole. That is why traditions as falles are also involved (even explicitly in the IRL pages I have shown). So, no discussion there.
• Another point for agreement about public and private universities, I accept your amendment here: Vives Network of Catalan language universities includes both public and private universities. You are completely right. No charades there. And this shows how wide the consensus is in the academic world about the very issue we are considering here: the validity of the so called Països Catalans as a cultural framework, defended by an institution including both public and private universities.
• And yet more agreement: the IRL was created by the Catalan and Balearic regional governments. Right. But don't forget that the institute belongs to a wider international entity: the Ramon Llull Foundation (FRL), where, in one way or another, all territories in the Catalan Countries are represented: the Catalan and Balearic regional governments via the IRL, the Andorra national government, the General Council of the Pyrénées-Orientales, the city council of Alghero and the Network of Valencian Cities.
• About other public institutions such as the Valencian Culture Council and the Institute Alfons el Magnànim, what I am supposed to find in their official pages? I see nothing surprising in there. They are cultural institutions working in the strict territory of the Valencian Community. Is that strange? Of course not, because they belong to the Valencian government so that's the legal framework where they can promote culture. The same happens for analogous institutions in other Spanish autonomous communities such as Catalan Council for Arts and Culture. These institutions do not claim that the Catalan Countries is not a valid framework, but they have to work inside the territory where they legally entitled to do so. To allow inter-regional cultural cooperation higher level institutions as those mentioned here many times have been created.
• About Casanova's book, you have completely missed the point here. As you may know, Giacomo Casanova spent many years of his life travelling around Europe and reporting his experience in personal diaries which eventually turned into the famous book Histoire de ma vie and it constitutes an extremely valuable source to understand European social life during the 18th century. He didn't write any book called From Sagunt to Perpignan. The relevant and very significant fact is that a couple of Valencian scholars have selected the fragment of his diaries corresponding to the part of Casanova's travel during 1768 crossing Catalan-speaking territories all the way south to north and published it in the publications of University of Valencia. What does it mean? They could have just selected the strictly Valencian segment of the travel, right? But they haven't. As they write in the introduction: "this is the translation of a fragment of the autobiographic book Histoire de ma vie by the writer and adventurer Giacomo Casanova de Seigalt, namely that corresponding to his stage in the Catalan Countries [sic]". Again, we find the same phenomenon: the choice of the framework for cultural means is the wide one. I didn't want to spend too much time comenting such a particular example, but your efforts to make it sound ridiculous by claiming that all territories crossed by Livingstone share the same culture (!!) forced me to solve the misunderstanding.

Finally, you want me to admit that this supposed Catalan-Valencian culture domain is only used by people with a pancatalanistic ideology. Well, I can admit it depending on what exactly the occurrence of the word 'pancatalanistic' means in this sentence. If by a 'pancatalanistic ideology' we denote the thesis claiming that the Catalan Countries share a common culture and, hence, are a valid framework for cultural promotion and studies (i.e. can be use as a cultural domain), then your sentence become synonymous to the Catalan-Valencian cultural domain is only used by people defending that the Catalan-Valencian cultural domain can be used as cultural domain, amounting to say that the Catalan-Valencian cultural domain is only used by those who use it, a real tautology which, of course, I admit to be true. But this is too silly, so you must mean something else, and if it is not the cultural aspect, then you must be pointing (again) to the political one. I already warned long ago about the dangers of mixing culture and politics in these discussions (because their topic is cultural and one should not deviate it to other, complicated, issues). But, don't worry, I can comment about it briefly. If we take the political meaning of the expression then by pancatalanistic ideology we will denote what can be roughly described as those proposals aiming to the construction of some kind of political entity based on the territories in the Catalan Countries. But then I can prove your sentence false. The Catalan-Valencian cultural domain is not used only by scholars defending those strong political claims. Often they are not known to defend any particular political position (they might be just doing their academic jobs without being politically active in most of the cases, right?), sometimes they are even known to defend opposite proposals. Take Joan Francesc Mira, author of some aforementioned sources. This influential Valencian professor is known not only for his work as researcher, translater, and essay and novel writer in a remarkably wide scope of cultural topics, but he has also some relevant political essays about the Valencian national question. Let me cite Sobre la nació dels valencians, 3 i 4, València, 1997 (it can be found on line here). In this book, departuring from Joan Fuster's theses, highly influential for many Valencian scholars in his generation, he proposes a strictly Valencian national project, while not denying the slighliest the wider cultural community with the remaining territories in the Catalan-Valencian. This is a fine example of the difference between a cultural and a political pancatalanism. So, I kindly ask you to avoid falling under the temptation of straight generalizations and be careful proving your points and (I will never insist enough on that) backing them up with sources. On the other hand, institutions such as the FRL have made explicit statements claiming their purely cultural apolitical nature (see it here). And, finally, it would be really weird (and definitely false I guess) to claim that RAE members who wrote the above mentioned manifesto defend political projects for the Catalan Countries, right?

And now, talking about sources, the new evidence I promised to bring. This link brings to the official page of the 35th edition of October awards. There we can see again the same situation: a prestigious cultural institution choosing this framework for cultural promotion. As every year since 1972, the Valencian publishing house Editorial 3 i 4 offers these awards to several kinds of works written in Catalan/Valencian, some of them literary (to novel, poetry and theater) but also to essays and works of journalistic research. And, again, it is not only about language, but culture in general for the awards are accompanied by symposiums on a variety of cultural topics; this year they are devoted, among other topics, to "War and repression in the Catalan culture" and "Spanish Civil War in the Catalan Countries". And, by the way, the Valencian Network of Cities as a whole participates in the event (you can see it, together with the current list of cities, here). --Carles Noguera (talk) 12:18, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Now I'm sure you don't want to get the point on this discussion. You told me that valencian public institutions agree with your ideas but I prove that this is false. Now you tell me that make our point stronger because there are public and private institutions, but if there were only public you teld me that it was also stronge, and if there were only privates too. Public institutions like Alfons el Magnànim say in his webpage L’objecte és estudiar i difondre la cultura de les humanitats en els àmbits d’interés valencià, espanyol i universal (he object is to study and disseminate the culture of the humanities in the fields of interest Valencian, Spanish and universal.) ¿where is catalan culture here? And the Consell Valencià de Cultura in [his webpage] say The Valencia Council of Culture (Consell Valencià de Cultura) is a consultation and advisory institution for the Valencia Regional Government (Generalitat Valenciana) for the specific affairs related to Valencian culture, please, do you want to accept the reality?

Pancatalanism is the ideology that wants to make Catalanonia, Valencia, Balearic islands, Rousillon, Andorra and East Aragon a state called catalan countries, and of course this is the ideology from Joan Francesc Mira, you must only see this image in his official webpage]. It was the front of a book called Introducció a un país. Of course, only one country called Catalonia but including Valencian Country too. And of course, if you want to believe that [Acció Cultural del País Valencià www.acpv.cat] don't have a political pancatalanistic background you could do it, but you'd be alone. As you could read in his webpage they I som a Internet per a treballar, també en aquest àmbit, per la llengua i la cultura catalanes i per la identitat nacional (are at Internet to work, too in this ambit, for the language and catalan culture and for national identity). Of course they are valencian, but they work for catalan national identity, so they want to create one state called Catalan countries. Please, to make stronger your point, you have to find only a reference that prove there are people who think that Valencian Country and Catalonia share one culture but are different countries, because mix culture and politic is not a good idea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.60.10.148 (talk) 20:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

• I am certainly trying to follow rigorously your every point in this discussion. You are asking me to provide evidence that the Catalan-Valencian is a valid cultural domain and that is what I am doing all the time. You wanted to know which public institutions support it and you have them: FRL, IRL, all public universities in the Catalan-Valencian domain in Joan Lluís Vives Institute, and even the Spanish Royal Academy released an official statement supporting it. Moreover, the Joan Lluís Vives Institute includes several private universities as well, as you pointed out, which only makes my position stronger as it shows that this point of view is shared by virtually the whole academic community.
• Showing that the Valencian Community has some public institutions devoted to the cultural promotion in a strictly Valencian context does not contradict this at all. Catalonia has them as well. As I said, it is a legal matter. Every institution must work in the context where it is legally allowed to do so. Let me make it clear by applying your same trick again: let us go to the next level below. Look at this: Castelló Cultural, a council for cultural promotion in the Valencian city of Castelló and its province. They write in the presentation: "Castelló Cultural és una iniciativa de la Generalitat Valenciana naixcuda el 1997 per a impulsar i promocionar la vida cultural de Castelló", i.e. they are devoted to promoting cultural life in Castelló. I could now mimic your rethorical trick: they do not mention Valencian culture, so does it mean that Valencian does not exist? Of course not. This is just the aim of a lower level institution working in a specific geographic area. When public instituions want to work at a wider level they create or join the appropriate councils, institutes, foundations or whatever. That is exactly what the city councils in the Valencian Network of Cities are doing by joining the Ramon Llull Foundation.
• Not willing to accept the mentioned facts, namely that the Catalan-Valencian cultural domain is a normal framework both for cultural institutions and academic sources, you try to mess it up with politics. You say that all of those who work in this context are pancatalanist in the political sense. All of them are separatists working to make Catalanonia, Valencia, Balearic islands, Rousillon, Andorra and East Aragon a state called catalan countries (!!), your words. But you don't prove it. This is your OR. In contrast I am proving quite the contrary: this political point of view is independent from the cultural activity we are discussing. Examples: (1) Joan Francesc Mira's book Sobre la nació dels valencians. You didn't pay full attention to my words. I said that in this book he was departuring from previous Fusterian theses, abandoning any proposal for a political Catalan Countries, and aiming at a purely Valencian political framework. (2) this press note on the enhancement of the Ramon Llull Foundation says: "tots els representants territorials van recalcar que la Fundació Ramon Llull era una institució apolítica" (my translation: "all territorial representatives stressed the fact that the Ramon Llull Foundation is an apolitical institution"). So the partners constituting the FRL make it very clear themselves: it is a purely cultural, not political, institution. (3) The RAE statement: "Es culturalmente aberrante todo intento —como el que contemplamos— de desmembrar el País Valenciano de la comunidad idiomática y cultural catalana, por la que, como escritores e intelectuales españoles, no tenemos sino respeto y admiración, dentro de la cual el País Valenciano ha tenido y tiene un lugar tan relevante" (my translation: "Any attempt, as the one we can see now, to separate the Valencian Country from the linguistic and cultural Catalan community (towards which we, as Spanish writers and intellectuals, feel respect and admiration, and inside which the Valencian Country has and has had a very relevant role) would be culturally aberrant". Another clear example defending that cultural domain by people who certainly are not known to hold any pancatalanistic political position. And we could give many many more. In fact, the burden of the proof for such a statement is on your side, for you are the one claiming that all of those institutions and universities and the dozens of scholars publishing books as those I have been citing hold some particular political position. Please do it, show me that pancatalanistic side of Camilo José Cela. It would be a remarkable finding. --Carles Noguera (talk) 21:28, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm very surprised that a person like you, who can take part in such a long discussion like this can't read properly. Alfons el Magnànim Institute says literally that they work for valencian, spanish and universal culture. They don't talk about catalan culture because catalan culture doesn't exist in Valencia, and of course is not a problem with the legal context because, as a valencian institution, they have the same right of talking about spanish and universal culture than catalan culture.

I have never deny that there are a minority of people who due to his political pancatalanistic ideas think that valencian and catalan have the same culture, but they are a small minority, and that's why this table disturb in Falles article. If you think that five (or ten, or twenty if you want) books that agree with this idea, published by a university that have hundred of them that don't agree this idea make a common framework, we don't have anything to talk about.

About Joan Francesc Mira, I try it again. He wrote one book that support the idea of a valencian politcal independency from catalonia, but during decades he thought that Valencian Country was only a part of Catalonia (as you could read here) and wrote a lot of books (like the one I show you last time). Suddenly he saw the light and now think valencian people are good enough to not depend from Catalonia. Maybe in few years he'll see another light and he realizes that valencian culture is not catalan culture.

Regarding to Ramon Llull institute I only could say that it's very curious. They talk about catalan culture, for example painting (they mentioned Picasso, Salvador Dalí, Joan Miró and others, but there aren't valencian painters like Joaquín Sorolla, José de Ribera or Vicente Masip. They talk about architechture naming Antoni Gaudí, Josep Antoni Coderch, Lluís Domènech i Montaner, Enric Miralles and all the constructions for the Olimpics in Barcelona, but there aren't too valencian architechts or valencian buildings. They talk about [catalan cuisine with Ferran Adrià, Carme Ruscalleda and Santi Santamaria but not about valencian cookers, and they only mentioned paella one time at the end and nothing more about valencian cuisine (and if you want to know it, the dish that catalan people name as paella is exactly the same that people from Madrid know as paella, that it's quite different from valencian typical paella). What can everybody understand about this? Very simple. Ramon Llull Institute thinks that valencian and catalan culture are diferent and only share the language and literature because in the catalan literature they do talk about Joanot Martorell and Ausiàs March.

Finally about RAE document I think is not relevant. First of all, it was signed by some very important writers as you said, but if you read it youd could find deseamos expresar, de acuerdo con todos los estudiosos de las lenguas románicas. They are talking about language, not culture, and this is because they don't agree with blaverism seccesionist ideas, that had a great support in that time. I understand that they wrote this document only by this reason, because as they said, it's very stupid consider valencian and catalan different languages. Moreover, RAE had several opinions about this asu you could read here. In early XX century RAE not only thought that valencian culture and catalan culture were different, they also thought their languages were too different. So, if you want to use one oppinion from RAE, maybe I'd use the other one. That's because RAE is an expert in languages, specially in castillan language, an that's all. If you want you could ask to an expert in valencian culture as Alfons el Magnànim or CVC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.60.10.148 (talk) 13:14, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again for your reply. I think this is a very interesting discussion in which both of us (and any casual reader) can certainly learn something about Valencian, Catalan, Balearic, etc culture and their academic and institutional treatment. Let us keep on exploring it until we reach the necessary understanding to find the best encyclopedical solution. As usual, I prefer a structured reply addressing points one by one. In all of them, it is again my intention to keep any personal opinion out the discussion and strictly refer to the written text we can find in the sources.

• Ramon Llull Foundation and Institute. This is the definition of these institutions in their official web page: "The Institut Ramon Llull is a consortium made up by the Government of Catalonia and the Government of the Balearic Islands dedicated to the international promotion of the Catalan language and the culture of the areas in which Catalan is spoken. The IRL forms part of the Fundació Ramon Llull, which was established by the governments of Andorra, the Ramon Llull Institute, General Council of the Eastern Pyrenees, the city of Alghero, and the Network of Valencian Cities, and has its central offices in Andorra". Let us carefully examine this definition. Take a look at this part: "promotion of the Catalan language and the culture of the areas in which Catalan is spoken". It is a crystal clear formulation, right? They work not only for language but for culture in general; and not only for culture based on Catalonia-proper, but for "culture of the areas in which Catalan is spoken". These areas include Valencian lands and they are represented in the foundation (in two different ways: (1) via the Network of Valencian Cities, and (2) via all public Valencian universities, because they belong to the Joan Lluís Vives Institute which is integrated in the Ramon Llull Institute). This is how these institutions define themselves and it clearly excludes your interpretation that "Ramon Llull Institute thinks that valencian and catalan culture are diferent and only share the language and literature". On the other hand, take a look at this other part: "which was established by the governments of Andorra, the Ramon Llull Institute, General Council of the Eastern Pyrenees, the city of Alghero, and the Network of Valencian Cities, and has its central offices in Andorra". Why would all those public institutions (including a national government!) establish (and fund!) an institution that promotes their common language but the culture of only a particular part of the geographical area? Why then would it be based in Andorra if it would not promote Andorran culture, but only Catalan culture and, incidentally, Andorran language because it happens to be the same. And, again, this fact, the promotion of culture from the whole domain, is exemplified in this page where traditions from Balearic islands (caixers and cavallers, Ibizan dances) and Valencia (moixeranga, Saint John bonfires, falles, correbous, moors and christians) are explicitly mentioned, although their are neither language nor literature. We can observe the same thing about cuisine: references to the cuisine in the whole domain (already clear in the citation of Lo llibre de Sent Soví), Catalan cuisine, Balearic cuisine (sobrassada, panellets, carquinyolis) and Valencian cuisine (Valencian paella [sic], carquinyolis, torrons) (as you can see, some shared with Catalonia, others more specific though related). Other sections regarding language-based cultural activities such as sung music or literature do mention Valencian important examples, but you already agreed with that (a very important "BTW" here: the musical section exemplifies very clearly that the notion of Catalan culture transcends Catalan language for they explicitly mention Flamenco, Rumba and other currents and artists which tipycally have used Spanish language in their musical creations). Nevertheless, you argue that some sections do not mention Valencian examples, and it is true. But take into account that this is not a full catalog of the cultural items under the scope of the institution, but just a promotional summary in the web page. There are Catalonia-proper cultural items missing as well, but we should not infer that they are do not belong to a scope that has been clearly explained in the main definition of the institutions. And I think we will agree that the official self-definition is the ultimate element to understand the aim of an institution.
• Alfons el Magnànim Institute and Valencian Council for Culture. My reasoning about legal framework was to clarify the activities of regional institutions as different from that of interregional, even international, institutions mentioned in the previous point. My rationale was: the Catalan regional government has institutions, such as the Catalan Council for Arts and Culture, which promote activities only in their autonomous community, which does not prevent to participate in higher-order institutions for transregional cultural cooperation; the same happens in Valencia. It is clear for the Valencian Council of Culture, analogous to the Catalan one. The Alfons el Magnànim Institute does not depend directly on the Valencian regional government but on a lower level institution: Diputació de València (a medium level institution for the Valencia province between city councils and regional government). Again, we should stick to the facts, i.e. to written statements. As you point out, in their self-definition they write: "L’objecte és estudiar i difondre la cultura de les humanitats en els àmbits d’interés valencià, espanyol i universal." ("our aim is to study and promote humanities culture in a Valencian, Spanish and universal framework"). So they are not only devoted to Valencian culture but also to Spanish culture and universal culture in general. They do not mention a Valencian-Catalan framework, you are right. But, as far as I can see, they do not claim that it does not exist. And, actually, some city councils belonging to Diputació de València do explicitly support Valencian-Catalan cultural domain is a valid framework by belonging to the Ramon Llull Foundation.
• Culture as separate from politics. Some lines above you told me: "to make stronger your point, you have to find only a reference that prove there are people who think that Valencian Country and Catalonia share one culture but are different countries, because mix culture and politic is not a good idea." I have provided more than one reference for this fact: Mira's latest position (evolving from previous ones, as you helped to understand), FRL partners official statements, and a RAE official statement. The sources are clear and I would like to kindly ask you to stick to the facts here as well. The wording is: "Any attempt, as the one we can see now, to separate the Valencian Country from the linguistic and cultural Catalan community (towards which we, as Spanish writers and intellectuals, feel respect and admiration, and inside which the Valencian Country has and has had a very relevant role) would be culturally aberrant". Trying to change the meaning of a statement by important intellectuals who have carefully chosen their words is just not acceptable. They speak about a cultural community and they are completely entitled to do so, for they are universally important writers and know a great deal about culture, don't they? That's what you wanted and you have it. Similarly unacceptable is trying to undermine such declaration by showing that one century ago the RAE held different positions about the unity of Catalan language. When in Wikipedia we say that statements must be sourced, we refer to those that have not been invalidated. Any scientific institution has its historical evolution and its statements may vary in time, and what matters for us is their last statement about a particular topic. Take any other long-lived scientific institution, the Royal Geographical Society for instance. Would you claim that they do not have a clear position about the geography of Antarctica because their statements on the topic back in 19th century do not coincide with recent ones? Science evolves and a new statement supersedes previous ones. Ergo, to invalidate my point you'll need to show a more recent statement by RAE claiming that they were wrong and have realized that Valencian-Catalan cultural community does not exist.--Carles Noguera (talk) 11:52, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

P.S: I realize it will be better to add a note here about a danger I have just noticed in your previous words. Take it just like a bit of friendly advice. When talking about Joan Francesc Mira you wrote: "Maybe in few years he'll see another light and he realizes that valencian culture is not catalan culture". Claiming such a thing is extremely dangerous because it might mean that when analyzing the works of a prestigious scholar you present your own opinion as a better one. You seem to say that you know something that poor professor still has not understood. Be careful, because that's the complete opposite to what we should be doing here: carefully read valid sources and reflect their statements on due weight in wikipedia articles.--Carles Noguera (talk) 12:18, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Three weeks later, no reply at all. I would like to know whether there is some remaining issue to discuss. --Carles Noguera (talk) 14:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm very busy now but next week I'll reply it.--213.162.199.100 (talk) 12:45, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello! Many thanks for you delivering a clarification. I think maybe your busy week has passed by now. Best of wishes.--Paracel63 (talk) 12:09, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

This is stupid, the document is not very accurate. One should definitely research from precise sites, such as www.RateMyPoo.com or www.Flashgames.co.uk. Next time I shall excrete in your article and see how you favour it so. So help me.

P.S. You should also consider washing your hands after you go to the toilet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.96.216.167 (talk) 20:26, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello. Maybe you could get your point a bit clearer. This discussion is about the article Falles and its possible relation with a common Catalan language/Valencian-speaking cultural domain. Someone above also questioned the very existence of Països Catalans. I think that is a different question that should be kept at Talk:Països Catalans. Best of wishes.--Paracel63 (talk) 12:09, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

The Catalan / Valencian cultural domain

There does not exist the cultural Catalan / Valencian domain, for the same reason that the holiday of the fallas is not considered to be a Catalan but Valencian holiday. Actually the fallas form a part of the cultural Valencian area.Valencia and the Catalan community have his own cultural differentiated identities one of other one — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.252.52.193 (talk) 01:29, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello, dear not-loggin-in-user. I hope you have read the elaborate reasoning above on this talk page. Especially the ones about language and culture and their different contact points. And noted the different sources and links provied. I also hope you understand the reasoning behind navigational boxes. Best of wishes,--Paracel63 (talk) 12:02, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Falles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130529214853/http://fallasfromvalencia.info/ to http://www.fallasfromvalencia.info/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080318214655/http://www.fallasfromvalencia.com/ to http://www.fallasfromvalencia.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:03, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Most important information absent

It is mind-boggling that an article about a festival doesn't mention the most important information: the dates. There is no mention of March 15 and you need to scroll down a bit to find the culmination on March 19. Instead, the date when it was included by UNESCO, sticks out in the introduction. --82.207.237.218 (talk) 21:49, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

 Fixed It's even more mind-boggling that you didn't fix this egregious omission yourself. Carlstak (talk) 04:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Maeztu Lleons 2015 12.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:07, 30 December 2022 (UTC)