Talk:Vizcaya Province

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Basque, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Basque Country, Basque people, Basque language, history and culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BasqueWikipedia:WikiProject BasqueTemplate:WikiProject BasqueBasque articles

Spain

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles

History

There's actually quite a lot of evidence of roman presence, and probable explotation of the iron mines; I reckon some developping on it (instead of a fast "not easy to civilize", only true for some parts of Biscay) could be more accurate. Moreover, maybe some insight could be given on the successive people inhabiting the region? Autrigons, the original settlers, were exterminated by an allience of romans and basques, as far as I know.

Perfect, if you know the facts go for it and edit the section.David 09:21, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of Biscay

Question?, I understood that "vizcaya" means high place in Spanish. I believe I saw the reference in a book about the Vizcaya in Miami. Do you know if that is correct or not? It looks like Vizcaya is located in part of the Pyrenees.

thanks taxlawyer1@yahoo.com

It is generally accepted that Bizkaia, the original Basque term means something like the mountain or the cliff. It's correlate of bizkar, meaning: 1. back, shoulders, 2. cliff, 3. roof structure, 4. leaning on (bizkarretik).

Biscay is not in the Pyrenees properly but in the much lower Basque Mountains that are between the Pyrenees and the Cantabrian Mountains. Ancient Romans called all them Pyrenees though. It is a mountainous rugged area but no peak is really high (there's no permanent snow anywhere, only in the coldest months of winter). It also has large coast, not much less mountainous than the interior actually. --Sugaar 22:17, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Province?

Hi there, Biscay is not a province, neither are Álava or Guipúzcoa. The three are offcially called "historic territories", and calling them provinces is a mistake (a common one, though).

Right and wrong. The use of province is correct as they are provinces in Spanish administration, have been so historically and the term is used normally when speaking in Spanish and other non-Basque European languages. The Statute of Autonomy (applying only to the BAC) uses the compromise term territorios históricos (historical territories) in Spanish but herrialdeak (regions) in Basque. For general purposes "province" is clear. When extending on the specificities of the status under the law, using more technical terminology (but from both Basque and Spanish usage) is logical. --Sugaar 18:00, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article name

The names of the Basque provinces seem to be regularly changed, both in the text and as article names. Clearly in the rest of Spain Vizcaya is used and in the Basque Country itself both Spanish and Basque names are used, with the latter gradually taking over. Both are official names so it shouldn't be contraversial. I'd prefer Bizkaia for traditional and local usage reasons, but would also be happy with Biscay as the English language compromise or the messy Bizkaia-Vizcaya for an official sounding version. Mtiedemann 09:19, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only official name is Bizkaia as stated the law about identity signs: name, flag and coat of arms (please read the first article in spanish and basque [1]). Guillermo 23:03, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only oficial name for the province is Bizkaia, but in English it is known as Biscay, in Spanish as Vizcaya and in French as Biscaye too. I personally think that the English name should be used in the English-language Wikipedia, when it exists. This is a difficult issue and I would suggest to use the standard English name when available, the same that you find an article titled Lisbon and not Lisboa (which is a Redirect). This can be directly done for Biscay (redirected from Vizcaya and Bizkaia), Navarre (redirected from Navarra and Nafarroa) and Lower Navarre (Basse Navarre and Behenafarroa). But it's more delicate with the other four provinces, that don't have explicitly English names.

I want to extend this article but I will do it only under Biscay or Bizkaia. I don't want to write an entry titled "Vizcaya" (that's why I don't write in the Spanish-language Wikipedia) --Sugaar 17:30, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Naming_conventions. It would seem to support the English names when available. Hence: Biscay, Navarre and Lower Navarre - and possibly also Labourd and Soule (actually the French names in these two cases). I think that Basque oficial name should be used for Gipuzkoa but have doubts about Alava-Araba. Probably Alava is more known.

I'll let it sleep one or two weeks and then proceed to normalize according to the above criteria if it haven't found any objection. --Sugaar 18:00, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to support Biscay for reasons given. Mtiedemann 23:45, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to oppose the use of the English word Biscay for the province. I argue that it is archaic and redundant in this sense and that it should only be used for the Bay of Biscay and the Meteorological Office area.

English names do drop out of use - no English speaker would surely insist on Saragossa for Zaragoza or Corunna for La Coruña nowadays: on the other hand Seville is still Seville not Sevilla and Andalusia/Andalucía is unresolved, though tending towards the latter due to the large number of British people living there who are adopting the local form. I do not dispute that there is an English word availabe, just that that word is not in fact used by English people anymore. If it is not even first choice among English-speakers it should not get top billing here. As I said, I have honestly never met any English-speakers living in the province who use the word Biscay. The word is so redundant thatthey dont actually realise that Bay of Biscay refers to Vizcaya/Bizkaia until it is pointed out to them. I am sure that the only provinces which still retain the English form in active use are Seville and Navarre. Jameswilson 23:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You allways refer to english living in Bizkaia...what about the rest of the world? I can't see a Canadian knowing that "Bizkaia" exists. Biscay is the existing UNIVERSAL english term. This is Wikipedia. I think you are approaching this from your "english living in Bizkaia" POV. In fact, what about "Vizcaya"? You mean that the modern english leanguage uses the basque name? come on! David 10:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1. 1. In my opinion the use the name Biscay is absolute rot. I know of no English person anywhere who uses this name Biscay for Bizkaia or Vizcaya. It is use on weather forecasts. Biscay is completely redundant as a name for this land area. It is an outrage of arrogance on the part of a couple of anglofiles such as you Deibid. Mondern english people use the local names, it is that simple. I don't know which planet you are from, but it certainly is not the one the rest of us live on. Basically David you "come on!" If the Canadians have to catch up, let them be happy that most Basque people could probably name only two places in bloody Canada, same goes for half the English Speaking world. What about Bombay... you have a problem with calling it mumbai just incase some one living in the rocky mountains doesn't keep up with current affairs? It is Vizcaya or Bizkaia, Biscay is the sea bit. Okay? Jeezus english people are so arrogant and dumb, and if wikipedia is controlled by the likes of David with his POV (sic) we are all the dumber for it Peta-x (talk) 13:37, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PAGE MOVED

I have moved the former entry Vizcaya to Biscay and have redirected Vizcaya and Bizkaia to this page, because everyone agrees with the official Wikipedia policy stating that english names should prevail when available in the english Wikipedia. David 10:49, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cast my objection to this - see previous section. English word exists but is no longer first choice for English-speakers.Jameswilson 23:06, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, lets settle this NOW: Official Biscay Government page, in ENGLISH:

http://www.bizkaia.net/home2/in_index.asp

All references say "Biscay".

David 10:06, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is for thick Americans so they feel at home they think it is named after a place in Miami Peta-x (talk) 14:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And what's the first-choice of English-speakers? The Spanish unofficial term Vizcaya or the native Basque oficial term Bizkaia?

Well, whatever the case, it's clear that the use of the English term is less POV. --Sugaar 22:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no way that English speakers use Biscay, that is the sea. I cast my objection to this also - see previous section. English word exists but is no longer first choice for English-speakers. The first choice of English speakers is not Biscay. As an example Bombay is nolonger Bombay it is Mumbai, there is no excuse for this page to continue to be titled Biscay, it is just a big trip for this guy David he is on one long rampant ego boost, you see how much damange he has done else where, I think he may possibly be autistic as his desire to wiki everything seems to be his personal goal, that only his interpretation of the guidelines are valid and the more quality information he can remove from a wiki entry the happier he is. It is just a jack off. Peta-x (talk) 14:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miami

Please, all information on Biscayne Miami should be in its own article. This article is about the original Biscay in Spain. David 17:55, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Adams

There is some material at Talk:Fuero#John Adams that may belong here. If not, someone may want to suggest where it does belong. - Jmabel | Talk 23:14, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite interesting, I didn't know about that John Adams trip to Biscay. You can include it here if you want, in the 'Modern Age' section. David 08:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]