Template talk:Catalan/Valencian cultural domain

Usage remarks

When placing this template in a page, use {{Catalan-speaking world|align=right}} or {{Catalan-speaking world|align=left}} to position it appropriately.

You can also include an image and caption. Here are two typical examples of such usage:

{{Catalan-speaking world|align=right|image=[[Image:Antonigaudí.jpg|Antoni Gaudí]]|caption=Antoni Gaudí}}

{{Catalan-speaking world|align=right|image=[[Image:Correfocs.jpg|250 px|Correfocs in Barcelona]]|caption=Correfocs in [[Barcelona]]}}

Prior usage discussion

No longer relevant! -- Jmabel | Talk 01:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

When placing this template in a page, use {{Catalan-speaking world|right}} or {{Catalan-speaking world|left}} to position it appropriately.

Often this follows another large box (see for example Catalan language). We've been having problems about how to place this template successfully in pages. We had originally tried:

<-- Do not do it this way! It doesn't work for Internet Explorer -->
<div style="float: right; clear: right; width: 170px;">
</div>
{{Catalan-speaking world|right}}

This looks right in Firefox, but it's a mess in Internet Explorer. So we tried:

<div style="float: right; clear: right; width: 170px;">
{{Catalan-speaking world|right}}
</div>

This looks right in Internet Explorer, but in Firefox the main body of text writes right over the template!

Can anyone work out how we can do this more successfully? -- Jmabel | Talk 05:11, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

The Firefox rendering is incorrect, for a change (see also Template talk:clearright). I've added clear:{{{1}}} and float:{{{1}}} to the table itself, not an enclosing div; this is the "proper" way to do it, and works correctly in both IE and Opera. I don't have access to Firefox at the moment, but it should work correctly there, too. —Cryptic (talk) 10:23, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, that did the trick. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:22, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

It looks like just {{Catalan-speaking world|right}} or {{Catalan-speaking world|left}} will work fine now. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:38, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Picasso

Picasso lived in Catalonia, loved it, got its influence, and even used catalan language occasionally, but it's (unfortunatelly for we catalans) excessive consider him a catalan artist. I think he was a spaniard, and was at less as french than catalan. --Joan sense nick 21:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Still, he was in Barcelona as his career first came to flower. Anyway, I'm not wedded to listing Picasso here, given that he was not Catalan.

Do we want to add Subirachs? -- 05:31, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't think so. I think Subirachs is a minor artist. What about Antoni Tàpies or Enric Miralles? But, in my opinion, only items that could be an icon of Catalonia should have a link in such a template. --Joan sense nick 15:59, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Tàpies certainly. I don't know Enric Miralles, so your call. I'm surprised you consider Subirachs minor, given that (despite being an atheist) he was commissioned to do a chapel at Montserrat and a major sculptural assemblage for the entrance of Sagrada Familia. Is there a more notable Catalan sculptor in the last 50 years? -- Jmabel | Talk 05:29, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, it's just personal preferences..., but I mean Subirachs is not an icon to represent the full country. In sculpture, I can remember the names of Josep Llimona, Pau Gargallo, Josep Clarà or Andreu Alfaro, for example. Unfortunatelly, there are not really great sculptors last decades. I don't know if it's usefull to consider Joan Brossa or Perejaume as sculptors. Enric Miralles was an architect. --Joan sense nick 23:28, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

• You know, on sober thought I'm going to drop Picasso on the basis that this template doesn't belong on the Picasso article. -- 05:03, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Not only Picasso

Besides Picasso, I have also a problem with adding this box too freely to internationally acclaimed artists such as Miro and Dali. Imagine that a similar box for 'English' language would be added to every important English or American artists. That would not only be ridiculous. So I would ask to use this template much, much more sparingly. Arnoutf 21:25, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

This template isn't mainly about language. It's an effort to use language as a method to split the difference between whether or not to handle the Catalan-speaking world as a "nation". Miró, in particular, is pretty iconic for the Catalan world. Banks derive logos from his design; there's a Miró mosaic in the middle of the Rambles. - Jmabel | Talk 05:58, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

There is a bigger Miró mural in the center of Madrid, and you should get informed about what he thought exactly about "Catalonia as a nation", really. 80.103.139.235 (talk) 02:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Image

Even though I put it there, I'm not entirely happy with Sagrada Familia as an image here, because it is so much a Barcelona Icon. I'd be very open to something else; we might want to consider a grouping of images, the way they did at Image:4Serbs.jpg. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:23, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, its a famous icon, like Tour Eiffel to France. I like it because it's work in progress, growing up, not finished,... --Joan sense nick 22:23, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I like Sagrada Família as well and its symbolism behind, but I also think it is too Barcelona-centric. We could make a composition from from different photos from all the territories. I have been looking at some already. We could suggest several proposals and choose that one which is preferred. Toniher 10:10, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

I think a common cultural symbol would be something related with the Saint Johns bonfire's, like correfocs. This activity is made in all the whole catalan-speaking countries on june 24th. But we may use the image from Muixeranga, an human castle, as it's from a Valencian town, but the human castles are also very common in Catalonia. --Joanot Martorell ✉ 20:43, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

You now can choose an image of your own, or no image, at each use. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Football teams?

I question the accumulation of football teams in this template. FC Barcelona belongs because it is, and was especially during the Franco era, a symbol of Catalan nationalism. Perhaps one or two others have a history like that; if so, the articles should document it. Barring that, I'd be inclined to drop them from the template. They are pretty incongruous when the template is included in, say, Crown of Aragon. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:52, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Here we should focus on language, culture, history and geography issues. --Joan sense nick 23:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

And in the past few days we have acquired yet more football teams. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:36, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

It seems to me to be time to bring this matter to a head: see Talk:War_of_the_Spanish_Succession#Template:Catalan-speaking_world. This is being used as an argument to refuse to allow this template in War of the Spanish Succession. I propose we create a separate, small Template:Football in the Catalan-speaking world, use that rather than this on the various football-team articles, and leave only FC Barcelona on this template. If there are no objections in the next 24 hours, I will feel free to go ahead with that. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:44, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. Maybe instead of football (soccer), we should say sport, because USAP is a rugby team. I'm not sure if we should leave any team despite FC BCN is surely the most important and worldwide known Catalan sport icon. Toniher 14:07, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

OK, Template:Sport in the Catalan-speaking world. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:01, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Image experiment

I've been experimenting with a way to get an image optionally into the template; see recent changes. I don't seem to have it right, though. For an example that shows what works and what doesn't, see Template talk:Catalan-speaking world/test. Does anyone see how to tweak the template to place the caption under the picture? -- Jmabel | Talk 08:02, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Got it! -- Jmabel | Talk 01:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Botifarra

You should include Botifarra, too. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.60.38.232 (talk • contribs) 1 October 2006.

Smaller box for Catalan literature portal?

I'm working on creating the Catalan Literature portal (Portal:Catalan Literature) and would like to get the template to line up a little better with the rest of the categories. I also need a lot of help adding items and editing/writing articles, so please contribute! Bewtros 18:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Grey Line Heavy

The gray line is heavier at the bottom. Please fix it. I don't know how. Thanks!68.148.164.166 (talk) 05:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Some additions

I have done some minor changes and added some items to the template. It should not be too Catalonia-centric, so I added some links on history and traditions of other Catalan-speaking regions. However, I am aware it should not be too extensive so the additions have been just a few. --Carles Noguera (talk) 13:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Catalan / valencian

The name of the language is valencian and catalan, so I've addet both names. I've changed in Geography the term "Països Catalans" because doesn't refer to a geografica concept, is a cultural/political (very controverted) concept.--Valsempre (talk) 10:17, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

About Països Catalans, it's a notable term that has to be linked on this template. If it can't go under geography, then where do we put it? --Enric Naval (talk) 21:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

It is quite clear to me that the role of this term here should be geographic, i.e. as a label to define the set of all Catalan-speaking territories. It can have a political meaning only when some groups use it to denote some proposals to build some kind of political union as an administrative unit that nowadays does not exist (and it is not clear at all that will ever exist). As for real political entities, the template is already accurate by collecting the current governments (national in the case of Andorra, regional in the remaining ones) and, hence, it is excluded any political usage of "Països Catalans" here. I propose to restore it in the geography section as it is the only place where it can be make some sense.

As for the issue of the name of language, I guess that the thing is more disputable. I would be more for leaving only "Catalan" here as it is much more common to use it as the global name for the language (specially in English sources). Entries about Valencian language, institutions and geography are already very clear and descriptive about the traditional and official usage of "Valencian" in Valencian contexts. Therefore, it seems to me that it is not necessary to have it also in the template, moreover as new ugly dash-constructed-pseudo-name. --Carles Noguera (talk) 09:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Carles, as a general comment not really referred to this particular discussion, in this damned Països Catalans question we do disagree (as I disagreed with Dúnadan, to his utter disappointment and frustration: sorry, dude). The thing is that, in my opinion, it can barely be claimed that it is a geographical question when it is defined by language. Language and territory are not related in any way. Territories do not speak languages. Territories do not speak at all.

Geography is about ecoregions, etc. Guardamar has nothing to do geographically with Olot, Lleida, Salses, Alguer or Inca. Their landscapes are different, their climates are different, even their Catalan dialects are different enough to pose serious problems to understand each other (can you really understand a Balearic peasant? tell the truth! :D)....actually, Guardamar is much more related to, say, Mazarrón in Murcia, geographically speaking.

Looks like it is not necessarily so in Catalonia, but, outside Catalonia (especially in Valencia and the Balearics) Països Catalans is a political concept, whether we like it or not. I dont know how I can convince you guys about that...I accept hints of what could help you, but I am afraid it is going to be difficult if you havent accepted this already by now...

Also another question not really related to this particular discussion...I am growing increasingly weary of the apparently unskippable tag "a Catalan dialect" whenever the word "Valencian" appears here in wikipedia.

According to our local Catalan sources, the language is Catalan-Valencian-Balear. It has been so since Josep Calveras used it for the first time in 1925, in his work La reconstrucció del llenguatge literari català: «"Catalan-Valencian-Balear" would be the proper name that would satisfy everyone, if it were not because it is too long and the philologists are used to say briefly: Catalan language». The official dictionary of the Institut d'Estudis Catalans has the title Diccionari Català-valencià-balear and international well established sources also quote it like that [1] so Valencian is no less a Catalan dialect as Catalan is a Valencian dialect, huh?

Then, why this variety must always be reduced to Catalan only? and why when the context allows Valencian to have its own five minutes of fame it has to be always policed by the reassuring comment "a Catalan dialect/the local name for Catalan"? this info on Valencian's philological filiation belongs (and is already) in the Valencian article, not elsewhere.

You know by now already that, like yourself, I do not support dash or slash conventions for toponimy, but, if you guys truly believe is the same thing under different names, then a comma "Catalan, Valencian" should be fine here at this template. And, if people out there practice the ever sanctified "unity", Valencian should not always and ever be chaperoned by the tag "a Catalan dialect". This is like the Holy Trinity: one and three at the same time, but you guys only see the One (Catalan, the God Father) and I think the other two are important by themselves (I'd say that Valencian is the Holy Ghost and Balearic the Son, but, this statement, I can not assure it categorically ;)

Dont get me wrong (in written everything tends to sound overstated and a kinda grumpy): I have no problems with you, on the contrary, you are the light of my days here in these articles :D....but, c'mon, Catalans, you have to loose the grip and be self-confident enough to allow Valencian be. After all, there is no love without freedom ;) Mountolive _{le déluge} 11:53, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I just noticed that Franja de Ponent, Northern Catalonia and Carxe are also exclusively delimited by language, yet they are also listed at the Geography section. And, of course, thay have also been used politically, see the debates about "franja de ponent / franja de aragon / franja oriental de aragon" (confict of interest disclaimer: I am involved on those debates about the name of the franja). --Enric Naval (talk) 00:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, the whole Països Catalans thing has a Catalan (vaguely or definitely nationalist, depending on the case and user) bias here in the English wikipedia. We are taking for granted that the view commonly accepted in Catalonia is the view commonly accepted elsewhere (which includes the mentioned territories) something which is wrong for the most part. This is not a new topic at all, but, maybe, at this point, there are enough users who are agreeable to even consider making some changes for NPOV in all the related articles....Mountolive _{le déluge} 10:15, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Those are other articles.... About this template here and now, This is a template linking differents articles on the topic "Catalan-speaking world" and Païssos Catalans is an important article on this topic. So, please, either someone proposes a beter placement or some other change, or it will have to be restored on the same place until a solution is found.

@Valsempre, if you think that the term is political, then find a way to place it into the template that makes clear that it's a political term, but don't try to keep an important link out of the template just because it's not on the right place. I don't think that anybody has argued that the term is not important for the topic. See Wikipedia:Don't demolish the house while it's still being built. Wikipedia is a work in progress, and it can afford a sort-of-bad-placed link while a better solution is worked out. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:14, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

P.D.: can we replace "geography" by something like "geo-political divisions" or something? --Enric Naval (talk) 22:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

As nobody answered, I went ahead and changed it --Enric Naval (talk) 22:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. Well, I am afraid this can be the beginning of a long and difficult discussion (fortunately we are clever and patient people that enjoy long difficult discussions more than other mundane pleasures... :P). Mountolive seems to be in the mood to open some new Pandora's box :P (I am not implying any bad faith, of course; I am only referring to the fact that you know very well that this points directly to very root of our deeper disagreements, and might be a challenge for the honeymoon we have been enjoying during the last months ;)).

In fact, I definitely agree with most of your rationale above, but I don't think they prove your point. Yes, I truly believe that 'Valencià' and 'Català' are two names for the same language that can be interchangeably used in some contexts (as declared in AVL documents and some judicial sentences). It is also true that outside Catalonia proper many people connect the expression 'Països Catalans' to the political projects based on such linguistical concept, disregarding its primary philological meaning. It is also true that the territories in the Catalan Countries do not form a geographical unit because of climate, landscape, etc. differences (BTW the same can be said about Catalonia proper and many other big enough countries). It is even true that mutual understanding is not always easy when confronting speakers from some distant dialects (another 'BTW': the same can be said about dozens of other languages with big enough geographical extension). Needless to say, it is true that territories do not speak languages (c'mon! Here you were trying to use some "atac a l'home de palla" argument, I mean trying to reduce the opponent's rationale to some nonsense he would never claim, and then show its absurdity). It is also true that 'Català-Valencià-Balear' (and other funny things such as 'Bacavà') was proposed as a name for the language. I do conceit all those points, but I insist that they do not seem (at least in my view) to prove your main points. Let me elaborate.

• About the usage of the concept of the Catalan Countries in the template. Well, this is a template about the Catalan-speaking world, so it seems impossible to avoid such concept. In the version of the template that has been undiscussed for a very long time, it was in the geography section. I thought (and keep on thinking) that this was a very natural option, since in order the describe what the Catalan-speaking world is, an essential information is to describe the geographical area where it is and it has been traditionally spoken, and 'Països Catalans' is just by definition a label to name this area (in the same fashion as Francophonie, Anglosphere and the like). Just using the label does not imply any other consequence (nobody claims a non-existing climate or whatever geographical unity, nobody claims that it is the only language nowadays spoken therein, nobody claims a non-existing political unity, in fact just after in the template one finds the links to the corresponding governments). Therefore, I would restore it as it was, but if somebody has a better proposal as regards where to place the label, please let me know.
• About the title. Here the discussion can be even more difficult as it may be related to somehow analogous situations in other topics. OK, we do not want to invent strange dash-constructed pseudo-names. But, let me draw your attention to something important: in other articles yourself have been arguing (and I never denied even if I had some doubts in some particular cases; remember 'Elche'-'Elx') that the names prominently used in English Wikipedia must be the most common in English sources. If this is the case, then we should stick to what is the most common name for our language in English sources, i.e. 'Catalan' whether we like or not. It is a fact that in academic contexts there has been a consistent insistence to keep the name 'Catalan' for the whole language (recall for instance the statutes of the University of Valencia that claim that the language is called 'Valencià' according to the Valencian automony statute, and 'Català' in the academy [2]; or a Valencian philologist arguing for 'Català' as the single academic name for the language [3]). So, is Wikipedia another academic context where the same applies? I am not completely sure about the answer, and hence I am really willing to discuss it with you and anybody else interested.--Carles Noguera (talk) 14:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

As a general comment, not addressed to anybody in particular, I just wish that it was normal and accepted by Catalan users (and some Valencian ones, who often are the most rabid of them all in terms of Catalan nationalist POV) that the tag "a Catalan dialect" should not have to be placed always and ever next to whatever mention of "Valencian". That would mean that those users feel self-confident enough about the identity of the language, something which is, obviously, not the case. Those users should ask themselves why they feel so insecure about it.

I sincerely recommend a politic/linguistic social psychoanalisis of the whole "Catalan-speaking Countries" wikiproject, and maybe one day we will all come clean :P

As for Carles, well, I will not risk our honeymoon nor open any Pandora box. I know what that means and I dont like it. So, I guess we will have to call it a day, then. Mountolive _{le déluge} 11:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Template name change

While the previous discussion goes on (actually....not that much lately) I'd like to propose a change of the name regardless of "Catalan" only or "Catalan-Valencian".

I find "The Catalan-(Valencian)-speaking world" inaccurate, odd and pretentious.

Inaccurate because in that "world" there are lots of people who do not speak Catalan (the traditional Spanish speaking territories in Valencia or the many Spanish/French/Italian monolinguals in these territories.

Odd because...is odd! "the Catalan-speaking world" does not sound that easy, does it?

Pretentious because calling that fraction a "World" is a bit out of hand. Those territories are too small all together to be possibly called a "world" whatsoever.

I'd therefore go for a name change. The only thing I can figure out tonight is "The Catalan(-Valencian) cultural domain". Not that great either, but I think it is an improvement.

Anybody agrees? Feel free to polish my suggestion or just work on some alternative from scratch. Mountolive _{le déluge} 03:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the discussion didn't went on much lately and it was my fault (I wanted to take a rest from these topics.... but unfortunately it seems not completely possible at this point). Well, let me say that I like the proposals that have been already implemented in the template. We can be coherent with the thesis that "català" and "valencià" are two names for the same language and translate it into English. I like the fact that regardless what is the most used word in English sources, sometimes we are allowed here to use other expressions for the sake of encyclopedical completeness showing all the cultural aspects of things. Good! --Carles Noguera (talk) 10:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, but I dont get your answer to my question. To put it more simple (my style writing tends to wander, I guess...) do you agree to replace "Catalan-(Valencian)-speaking world" by "Catalan-(Valencian)-cultural domain"? I am not discussing at this point whether to include Valencian or not, but asking to change "speaking world" by "cultural domain".

Good to see you back in command. Just dont leave, dude! Mountolive _{le déluge} 16:30, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I agree with that change of "speaking world" into "cultural domain" if you find it better. I didn't have problems with the "world" thing, but that one is alright as well. About writing there just "Catalan" or "Catalan-Valencian" instead, I already expressed above that there are good reasons for the first option, but I also understand that it may be better to have the double name to show the stuff at its full complexity and satisfy all sensibilities. As far as I am concerned, you can proceed with that. --Carles Noguera (talk) 16:42, 25 November 2008 (UTC) _{I am also happy to hear you in your usual friendly attitude. Some days ago I was a little angry at you (and vice versa I guess), but that's probably unavoidable because of our different sensibilities about some things.... Anyway it is also true that I am tired and I would like somebody to substitute my role here...}

I moved it. Hope we all like the result, but it is definitely open to improvement. As for the addition of "Valencian", being the Valencian Community the other major (and rival) element in this Holy Països Catalans Trinity, I think it is worth it mentioning it as to make more people feel included Mountolive _{le déluge} 18:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the change which can be seen as an improvement that makes the template better fitted for the entries where it was already used.--Carles Noguera (talk) 14:23, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

For the record: partial overlap with Template:Catalan / Template:Catalan grammar

Just for the record: there's another template solely for the language (grammar, pronunciation...). Some overlap is expected, but please, try to avoid it as much as possible. That template may be renamed soon, it's either Template:Catalan or Template:Catalan grammar. Thank you.--Fauban 10:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)