Jump to content

User talk:Impru20/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8→Archive 10

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For your excellent work creating detailed, informative and thorough articles on Spanish elections. Petrovic-Njegos (talk) 22:14, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Edits

It's sad that you're making very rude discussions about that. Even when you're editing an article almost entirely by yourself, it doesn't justify that you don't have to explain the changes that you're making on the edit summaries. Or do you think no one else could see them? Or that no one else wants to review the edits made on the articles? Please reconsider your thoughts, because you're not the owner of the articles (and as I looked, you're having very long discussions on other articles, in which you're imposing your point of view, and blocking any change saying repeatedly that "these are not valid arguments" [it would be very useful to all us here that you could explain what arguments are "valid" according to your thoughts]). Regards, and watch your type of expression. --Sfs90 (talk) 00:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Again: If you're still thinking that you're the owner of the articles, you're going to have a lot of discussions (even more than the ones that you're currently having, and you have no capacity to give up against the opinions of other users, trying to believe that you're the only one who has the reason here in Wikipedia). Your "I'm the article owner, so don't mess" attitude is the thing that I criticise you (and I have all the right to criticise you in that way, as sure some users would think about that). The colors edits that I made (as you could verify), I made it with sources and other elements that could complement my edit summary (graphics manuals, references, etc.) things that you don't do at any of your color templates, giving arbitrary colors without any explanation (even, if we're going more precise, we could even criticise you why you put some shade of green for a party instead of other shade, and you couldn't give us any reliable argument more than "I created, and I'm the owner of the template"). Cheers, happy new year and be careful with your rudeness ;) --Sfs90 (talk) 05:19, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm not going to waste my time discussing with you. It looks clearly to what point this is going to be if I continue discussing with you. Anyway, I repeat it: be careful with your attitude. Nothing more. Regards. --Sfs90 (talk) 06:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Ok. --Sfs90 (talk) 07:04, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 26 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Spanish general election, 2015

Impru20 PP's member are using that revelation to force Sanchez not to pact with Podemos. Therefore it is playing a part on the negotiation. “Iglesias no podría sentarse en este Parlamento si lo ha financiado Irán” "Sánchez tiene que decidir si se va a montar en el avión de Maduro con los de la CUP y Podemos o va a volver a la centralidad" http://www.lavozdegalicia.es/noticia/espana/2016/01/25/pp-ve-suicida-pacto-psoe-podemos/00031453729943218505699.htm?piano_d=1 http://www.lavozdegalicia.es/noticia/espana/2016/01/25/pp-ve-suicida-pacto-psoe-podemos/00031453729943218505699.htm?piano_d=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Todoslosquestan (talk • contribs) 19:51, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

"I should remind you that the PP is not negotiating anything with Podemos," No, but it is negotiating a pact with PSOE, and Ciudadanos plays a role

"and that PP members have kept insulting Podemos members (going as far as to call them "dirty" and "needing a shower") and wanting to keep up a connection between Podemos and Venezuela for nearly two years now. Well there is a connection to Chavism, but this has nothing to do with this article.

So it saying it again is not something new, and indeed does not mean it affects negotiations. The Spanish media are not showing this as a relevant fact, because it isn't." The Spanish media do show this as relevant fact (Antena 3, 13tv, Cope, for example), the fact that they have been attacked before doesn't change a thing. Besides Ciudadanos has also ask for explanations to Podemos.

"But the corruption scandals in the PP have, however, opened the main media headlines, and does indeed increase the difficulty for it reaching an agreement with either C's or PSOE. " I agree and that is why the PP scandals section should continue.

"If you don't like the corruption scandals in the PP, you should maybe go ask them to please stop it," I'm afraid they won't listen

"but that is not reason to post deliberately false information in an article (two, in fact, as you did) just to attack a party." "deliberately false"? Didn't they get on the plane? Is Pablo not financed by Iran?" Besides we're not judging, we're posting what is being commented on the media.

"If you keep on this behaviour I'll have to consider this as disruptive editing and will have to report it in the proper place." The same could be said about you, we don't want a Podemos bias here, don't we? 

Cheers.

A tu salud! Impru20 (talk) 19:50, 27 January 2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Todoslosquestan (talk • contribs)

Ok I see your point, this information is "more of the same", so to speak, and has no direct impact in the negotiation unless the PSOE treats it as relevant. I see, but for the PP is corruption is also "more of the same", although I agree it has a bigger impact. How about if we put under "Ongoing Pp Scandals", Rafael Hernandez reply that two different yardsticks are being used with PP and Podemos. http://okdiario.com/espana/rafael-hernando-iglesias-no-podria-sentarse-en-este-parlamento-si-lo-ha-financiado-iran-60283#Todoslosquestan (talk) 20:13, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

"Two different two different yardsticks? What? If the ruling party gets rocketed by continuous corruption scandals at a time when it is seeking re-election for government, and the two parties that may allow for it are demaning the PP a harder stance on corruption, it is surely relevant. " It's the PP's defense. "So far, I don't know what relevance has in the article what you say on Podemos," It's Rafael Hernandez answers to the detentions. It's relevant to post how the PP is reacting to that.

"which is just sensationalism aside from original research (you're making the connection yourself from sources that state a supposed connection between Podemos and Venezuela. " What? I'm sorry but I'm citing newspapers not making things up.

"You don't cite sources that do prove that connection between Podemos and Venezuela (we can't work on mere guessings, sorry), " El mundo, El País, ABC, ...

"or that Podemos is financed by Iran (which could be a crime, and you surely would need proofs to say a party has committed a crime). Neither do you, much less, cite sources making the connection between that and the theme in question; you make the connection yourself)." There is a report from the UDEF, again I can link you that reports.

"Besides, you just keep citing right-wing sensationalism media as sources. I expect you don't try to put "Ok diario" as a credible source. " And? Right-wing media is at least as credible as left-wing. You don't expect me to put Eldiario.es, do you?

"It comes near "El Mundo Today" in credibility." Your subjectively subjective opinion.

Well, I guess that right-wing media is not precisely "objective" when it comes at informing on a left-wing party they hate.

I'm not forced to anything, I did a google news search, but you can have the same information on: http://www.abc.es/espana/abci-careta-pablo-iglesias-esta-desapareciendo-201601150920_noticia.html And there you are: http://www.elmundo.es/espana/2016/01/27/56a7fb59e2704e804e8b464a.html Soraya Saez de Santamaria talking about the infamous plane. It's getting more relevant, don't you think?Todoslosquestan (talk) 20:48, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Podemos

We need to make reference to those controversies. They may seem fair or unfair, but they have been relevant and widely reported specially Monedero and Errejon cases.Todoslosquestan (talk) 20:19, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

"The leaders of Podemos has tried to distance themselves from the Government of Venezuela following allegations of "murky" funding. [63][64] Over the years prior to the founding of Podemos, several members, including leader Pablo Iglesias,carried out research and Consulting work in leftist Latin American governments involving several members, including Pablo Iglesias earned their consulting organization, Center for Political and Social Studies Foundation (CEPS Foundation), €3.5 million which helped fund the television debate shows that helped Podemos' popularity to increase quickly.[63][64]. One of the party’s founding members, Juan Carlos Monedero, received €425,000 for political consultancy work for the Bolivarian bloc of Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua. Monedero admitted to having set up a one-man company in his own name to paid less tax, but said he had since donated €200,000 to the tax office. Podemos called for an external auditor to observe accounts from February 2014 to December 2014 which showed that the total income from both private donations and state subsidies was at about €947,000, though the largest donors to the party were Podemos' own five MEPs.[63][65] Podemos' secretary, Iñigo Errejon, recieved a scholarship of 1,800 Euros a month from the University of Malaga, for undertaking a presential research job of 40 hours per week at the University. The scholarship was given with the help of Alberto Montero, chair of economics at the University of Malaga and member of Podemos. Montero confirmed giving permission for Errejon to pursue his research in Madrid but the University launched disciplinary proceedings against him for being abscent.[66] On 21 January 2016, Spanish TV channel Antena 3 broadcasted a video of CUP Deputy Anna Gabriel, María José Aguilar (in charge of Podemos in Castilla-La Mancha) and Ignacio Gil de San Vicente (the father-in-law of ETA’s former top leader David Pla and father of terrorist Kizkitza Gil de San Vicente) boarding a Venezuelan Air Force jet sent by President Nicolás Maduro. According to the television network, the video is another example of the ties that exist between Chavism and Podemos, the anti-capitalist movement in Catalonia, and ETA. [67] The same week the media reported that National Police's Economic and Financial Crimes Unit (UDEF) had opened an investigation into alleged illegal party financing from Iran. Pablo Iglesias' company received 9.3 million euros ($10.1 million) from the Iranian government between 2012 and 2015, via a number of other firms, "to avoid the embargoes imposed on Iran." [68] Podemos has denied that it has received any financial backing from Venezuela or Iran. But some members have acknowledged that they had worked as private consultants to the government in Caracas.

Please how can we make it more neutral?"Todoslosquestan (talk) 20:39, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

"€3.5 million which helped fund the television debate shows that helped Podemos' popularity to increase quickly." that was in the reaction part. The rest is also not written by me, they are excerpts of the references. But I will take your suggestions, thank you.Todoslosquestan (talk) 20:55, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

I need help with The Antena 3 exclusive: the criticism I find is on the social media. "most of the info you put as "facts" has been proven false afterwards." ¿?Todoslosquestan (talk) 21:15, 27 January 2016 (UTC) So they took the plane sent by Maduro (here, i think, is the connection) and never went to the "international meeting of intellectuals and artists in defense of humanity". How about the rest: "The leaders of Podemos has tried to distance themselves from the Government of Venezuela. [1][2] Over the years prior to the founding of Podemos, several members, including leader Pablo Iglesias, carried out research and Consulting work in leftist Latin American governments involving several members, including Pablo Iglesias earned their consulting organization, Center for Political and Social Studies Foundation (CEPS Foundation), €3.5 million.[1][2]. One of the party’s founding members, Juan Carlos Monedero, received €425,000 for political consultancy work for the Bolivarian bloc of Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua. Monedero admitted to having set up a one-man company in his own name to paid less tax, but said he had since donated €200,000 to the tax office. Podemos called for an external auditor to observe accounts from February 2014 to December 2014 which showed that the total income from both private donations and state subsidies was at about €947,000, though the largest donors to the party were Podemos' own five MEPs.[1][3]

Podemos' secretary, Iñigo Errejon, recieved a scholarship of 1,800 Euros a month from the University of Malaga, for undertaking a presential research job of 40 hours per week at the University. The scholarship was given with the help of ex CEPS pressident, Alberto Montero, chair of economics at the University of Malaga and later a member of Podemos. Montero confirmed giving permission for Errejon to pursue his research in Madrid but the University launched disciplinary proceedings against him for being abscent.[4] The "disciplinary proceeding" was opened after Podemos' rise in the polls and it was criticized as a political move, as well as the fact that Adelaida de la Calle, who opened such proceeding, was later named into Susana Díaz' government after the 2015 regional election[5].

On January 2016, the media reported that National Police's Economic and Financial Crimes Unit (UDEF) had opened an investigation into alleged illegal party financing from Iran. Pablo Iglesias' company received 9.3 million euros ($10.1 million) from the Iranian government between 2012 and 2015, via a number of other firms, "to avoid the embargoes imposed on Iran." Iglesias insisted that he was glad that the UDEF is investigating this matter and is at their disposal, that Podemos' finances were clean and transparent and its accounts had been externally audited. [7]" Thanks for your helpTodoslosquestan (talk) 21:39, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

-I'm sure Maduro doesn't show the generosity he so lacks with his own citizens with random people from other countries.

-It certainly offers a different point and I thank you for that.

-Well Ciudadanos, for example, got a Controversies section. If I wanted your "good check" was because you reversed the changes, and so I looked for consensus. I think the middle ground will be to put only what has undoubtedly been relevant: CEPS, Monedero and Errejon. The Iran finaciation should probably be there too, maybe in the future.Todoslosquestan (talk) 23:01, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

"And again, I don't mind what Maduro wants to do," I believe you.

"since we don't know what does he think in the first place. That does not prove at all that Podemos as a party has connections with chavism." You sure? But the question is, is it published in El Mundo, ABC, Elpais or not? We add to information related to the subject that is relevant not what you are convinced is the truth.

"They share some aspects of ideology (logical, being both, as well as the CUP or the BNG, left-wing parties) and some party members have shown sympathy for some of Chávez' management while in government, but that does not mean Podemos as a whole has connections with Chavism as you say." Podemos is not chavist, only its founders (Monedero even had an study near Chavez).

"Specially seeing how Antena 3 itself later posted an information saying how María José Aguilar's travel was for personal purposes without any relation to the party (back then she did not have any official post within the party; see here)." So the party now has another peson related to Chavism.

"And I find rather absurd to keep posting information saying "Podemos was thought to do this but it was later denied". That lady went on a plane sent by a dictator, care to say what of that information was denied?

"For which purpose? You post information, seemingly trying to confirm it, and then go and say that it is denied. So what's the purpose of having it there in the first place if it has no relation to the party's activity?" Again, cause it was widely discussed on the media, appeared on printed press, etc.

"And you would surely need something stronger that just your thought that Maduro doesn't show the generosity he so lacks with his own citizens with random people from other countries. That is original research, again. Do you know that I'm keeping posting you links to Wikipedia policies for something, yeah?" That's why I post what is reported in the media which is what is relevant not my thoughts on the subject.

"I reverted the changes, but my reverting was thanked by other podemita who, surely, would have reverted them if I hadn't done it earlier. I checked the C's "controversies" section, and indeed it suffers from the same: it puts outdated info as if it was actual. I taked a look and it was mostly done by IP users. I already went on and removed it; seems fair."

"Probably none of it should be there, at least for now, since the usefulness of such a section is very disputable (and has indeed been disputed in the past). Furthermore, it's clear you are not either prepared or willing to do such a task in a neutral way, at least seeing the sources you seem to be managing (the Iran financing thing seems laughable; they go on this issue over and over all the time despite it already having been confirmed as sensationalism." Confirmed by who? http://www.elmundo.es/cronica/2016/01/17/569a2b2fe2704e0d338b4618.html http://www.abc.es/espana/abci-pablo-iglesias-cobrado-93000-euros-iran-entre-2013-y-2015-201601140057_noticia.html Besides the illegal funding, that Pablo works for the Iran's public TV is a proved thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8MsoSv0R0s

"Not sure what its relevance to the article is; should we speak on the PP government selling weapons to Venezuela and Arabia Saudi in its article (and that is a proven thing)?" Tu quoque. But aren't we taking about relevance, about what was discussed by the media? You realised Podemos=Chavismo on the media is not something that should be ignored on an encyclopedia article about this party.

"Surely not, because it is just absurd). But again, if you consider it so important, open the discussion at the talk page and see if anyone supports the idea and, in that case, how could it be managed" Will I get your support? And the one that thanked you so quickly? Cheers!Todoslosquestan (talk) 00:32, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Italian election graphs

Hi Impru20 and happy new year! I know that you have been so engaged with the Spanish general election in December, but when you have time could you update the graph about the next Italian election? And maybe, if you want, could you upload also the one about the 2013 election? Thank you very much and best wishes! -- Nick.mon (talk) 12:57, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Excuse me, if you don't want to do it, or if you can't, you can also di tell me the website where you create these graphs, and I will do it. The one about Italian election, hasn't been updated since October! Thanks -- Nick.mon (talk) 13:09, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Undo

I find it fascinating how you have redirected all of your opinion polls to a different article, but you want a summary on the German one. Care to explain why? KevinNinja (talk) 18:21, 31 January 2016 (UTC) Edit: Not all of them, but on the upcoming spanish election this has been done.

Reference errors on 31 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Juan Cruz Alli

The article Juan Cruz Alli has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Psemmler (talk) 21:25, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 7 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Election graph 1986

Hi, could you please explain more why you reverted my edit? I explained that People's Coalition was comprised at a national level of AP, PDP and PL, not only AP. You said that "the other parties are not required here", but under what reason you say that? The thing that the AP was the major party doesn't represent the fact that the other two parties were also presenting candidates at all constituencies (even more, you could take a look at the paper ballots and posters from that year, and clearly do represent all three party logos, like this, this and this). I hope that this could clarify the aspect of having the logos on the tables. Regards. --Sfs90 (talk) 23:51, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Overlinking

Hi, thanks for your work. Please ensure that years, dates, and common terms are not linked‚ unless there's a particular reason for doing that. Tony (talk) 11:56, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Votación sobre mapas

Buenas, compañero.

Te solicito que votes en la discusión de los artículos de Basque Country (autonomous community) y Valencian Community para elegir el mapa localizador de ambas comunidades autónomas, apoyando el tipo standar para todas las regiones del país. Algunos usuarios nacionalistas o abiertamente independentistas quieren añadir un mapa sesgado en el que no aparece todo el país (en el caso de Euskadi) o que aparece como si fuese una nación de la Unión Europea (en el caso de la Comunidad Valenciana). Esto es inadmisible.

Te pido que añadas "support" y tu firma en la opción Satesclop's red map. Mil gracias por adelantado. Satesclop 02:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Irish Election Polls Graphic

Impru

Could you perhaps remove the underlying poll data before 01 Feb 2012 as the graphic is excessively wide at this time and set to get even wider with 5 more polls incoming at least. Thanks. Wikimucker (talk) 20:13, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

AIV

Information icon Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, it appears that the editor you reported may not have engaged in vandalism, or the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned. Please note there is a difference between vandalism and unhelpful or misguided edits made in good faith. If the user continues to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report it. Thank you.

It wasn't vandalism, from either party. Please stop edit-warring over your comments. --John (talk) 20:58, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Graphical Summary

Hello, dear Impru20! It seems like you are creating the most useful and informative graphical summaries, and I want to ask, is there any programme where I can do similar GS? Thanks. --Mirashhh (talk) 19:36, 16 February 2016 (UTC)Mirashhh

Impru20, is there some tutorials about creating graphs? Or at least adding dots to them. Now, I can do only things like this: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Poland2019.jpg

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirashhh (talk • contribs) 20:07, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Use of logos on Opinion polling for the Irish general election, 2016

Hi, I noticed your [edit] on the page, and wanted to clarify as the same kind of format is used on Opinion polling for the next Spanish general election, which I thought looks better, is used on that page too(and Opinion polling for the Spanish general election, 2015). Are these in breach of non-free content criteria too and if not why? Also what was different about the Social Democrats logo that made it ok? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranníocóir (talk • contribs) 18:30, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Re Ah, I see now, thanks. Ranníocóir (talk) 19:30, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 21 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of José Antonio Rodríguez Martínez

The article José Antonio Rodríguez Martínez has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. GABHello! 02:28, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Democratic Coalition color

Hi! I suggest that the color of Democratic Coalition would be some green color/tone, because that was the color they used on their symbols and election posters, like this and this. The coalition doesn't used the AP colors or any orange/yellow/mustard tones. I know that this could mean that the election apportionment diagrams, maps and other images should have to change the color for Democratic Coalition, but this change could give some more exactitude about the colors used by the parties/coalitions. Regards. --Sfs90 (talk) 19:19, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Italian 2013 election graph

Hi Impru20! Are the polling tables about 2013 Italian election ready? I saw that are some months which are in your sandbox, maybe if you need an help I can insert the missing pollings, even if I think that they are almost complete.

P.S. When you have time, could you update the graph about the next Italian election? Thank you very much! -- Nick.mon (talk) 17:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Antonio Maíllo

The article Antonio Maíllo has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. GABHello! 17:03, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

March 2016

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to a page, specifically User:Impru20/sandbox, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:10, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Impru20/sandbox

User:Impru20/sandbox, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Impru20/sandbox and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Impru20/sandbox during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 12:41, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Spanish Socialist Workers' Party leadership election, 2014, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Province of Jaén and Province of Córdoba (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Podemos census called to vote

Hi, I suggest that you could look and not change again the total census of Podemos members called to vote, that is of 393,538, as stated here, and not only the 190,291 called as "personas inscritas activas" (that is, the people that had participated on at least one internal decision in the last year as said here). Regards. --Sfs90 (talk) 20:39, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, I thanked for your edit, because it seems fair to specify both "censuses". Also, it would be great if you could write some kind of explanation about that difference on the kind of voters in the paragraph above the results table (in case some readers that are non-experts on Podemos or Spanish politics could'nt notice the difference between both voters totals [active registered and the total stated at the end of the table]). Regards. --Sfs90 (talk) 20:48, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Podemos - United Left merger?

Hi,

in the article Opinion polling for the next Spanish general election, you've merged the columns and polling data for Podemos and IU. Can I ask, what is the background for that change? I've done some research, and can't find a single source stating that those two have merged, or even have an electoral pact going.

In my opinion, merging their data is misleading, and consistently puts them above PSOE, which is false (according to most polls, at least). Unless you have a good reason for conjoining Podemos and IU, I suggest you revert that change.

Μαρκος Δ (talk) 18:47, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Spanish election "declared" prematurely

You changed the title of the Spanish election page and declared it for happening based on an article, which only says the final consultations by the King are on 25-26, and that he afterwards will inform the Speaker that further talks are futile. Please be a little more patient and wait for a proper source, which actually says the election will happen. No reason to jump the gun.--Batmacumba (talk) 08:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Preparations for the election are already underway since 12 April, with more than a single article as source (check 2015–16 Spanish government formation#Road to a new election, which gives more links; I didn't wanted to repeat the same all over the 2016 election article when it already redirects to the other one). As per WP:CRYSTALBALL#1, for the case of future events: Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Dates are not definite until the event actually takes place. If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented.

As of currently, we have enough proof of the event being almost certain to take place on 26 June (because the date is already set legally, parties are already campaigning, dissolution decree has been already prepared, Congress is gearing up for dissolution, most media and political pundits and even the King himself take a new election for granted, etc). Note how WP:CRYSTAL does not require to have 100% proof that the event will take place without the slightest of doubts. In the (rather unlikely, but still possible) event the election is not held, the article may still be moved back to its previous place, but currently there's enough documentation available to substantiate a basis for the 26 June election, and to consider that the "Spanish general election, 2016" denomination for the article may, under current circumstances, have more usefulness for searching users and to discuss current events. So not really "premature" in itself.

This would be akin to articles like United States presidential election, 2020 or United States presidential election, 2024 being already in existence, since there's still some room for those to not happen, but there's enough documentation proving that there's a near certainty that those will happen.

Cheers. Impru20 (talk) 12:19, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, I suppose I then simply disagree with the "Chrystal Ball" policy, but such policies are usually impossible to get scrapped. The last comparison is incorrect (and needlessly condescending). Elections scheduled to happen with regular intervals according to the constitution are different than this situation, where a constitutional deadline exists, but decisions by political parties can prevent that deadline from coming into force.--Batmacumba (talk) 12:34, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Batmacumba That's not relevant. The US Constitution could be amended before 2020 or 2024 and have the constitutional regular intervals lifted (or replace them for others). We may not know; that's possible, yet it's not a likely possibility. In this case, the constitutional deadline for the Spanish election to happen in 2016 is, theoretically, 2 May. However, the legal deadline would be tomorrow (27 April) at 16:00 CET (in order to have time for a full investiture session with two votings to be held in accordance to law). And, in practice, King Felipe VI has already set the 25–26 April talks as the deadline (and he is the one that must grant the Cortes' dissolution). Not really up to decisions by political parties any longer, or not just, with preparations being already underway for the event to take place. Impru20 (talk) 12:53, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Opinion polling for the Spanish general election, 2016 graphical summary

Hello

Congratulations for your great job! I think it'd be really convenient if you could change in the file called OpinionPollingSpainGeneralElectionNext.png the horizontal axis to make it end in June 2016. It is now the official date for the next election and, also, it'd make much easier to see the lines.

¡Gracias! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zarzaal (talk • contribs) 23:13, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

XI Legislatura

Buenas, Impru. Te escribo en castellano al descubrir que eres español. ¿No se debería hacer algún artículo en especial para la breve XI legislatura que hemos tenido, así como hacer mención a ella en el artículo List of Prime Ministers of Spain?

En el artículo se podría incluir lo de Soria así como un resumen de los fracasos a la hora de formar gobierno. Un saludo y gracias por tu trabajo, es una gran referencia para seguir los sondeos políticos. Asturkian (talk) 11:47, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

De acuerdo. No sabía que lo habías enfocado como un artículo general. De momento lo que he hecho ha sido "modificar" algo la plantilla Template:Cabinets of Spain renombrándola "Cabinets and Legislatures" y añadiendo la XI legislatura como un enlace al artículo que me has indicado. Si te parece bien, la añado al artículo List of Prime Ministers of Spain haciendo constar claramente que Mariano ha sido un "caretaker", aunque ese término me suena demasiado futbolero y yo usaría lo de "Acting". Un saludo. Asturkian (talk) 12:34, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Catalan parliamentary election 2015

Hello Impru20. I have made some additions and re-arranged a little that article. Regarding your summary edit the other day pointing to the independence issue as the only factor leading to the election, I agree with you that this was the stated purpose and -to some extent- the major one. On the other side, we can not deny the importance of CiU being in minority with ERC lending only limited support and the legislature at a stalemate, basically producing pro-independence pieces while neglecting other pieces of legislation to avoid clashes between CiU and ERC. It's important not to forget that, while CDC and ERC are basically aligned when it comes to independence, they are bitter rivals in basically all other political issues. I think it is worth to address this issue of CiU lacking a majority as one of the factors in the background of the election.

I think we can improve together that article (which is not the worse out there, by the way). In case you have serious issues with my most recent edit, I kindly ask you to address it at the talk page there and we discuss it, sounds good? Best regards. MOUNTOLIVE fedeli alla linea 14:37, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Spanish general election, 1876, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Historical regions of Spain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:06, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited És el moment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enric Morera (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Reverted edition about podemos

Hi. I would like to ask you to undo your reversion [1]. What is sourced is the used of the term populist, but along the article it is clearly stated that it isn't a generally accepted qualification, and is mainly used by Podemos' rivals. --Fjsalguero (talk) 07:10, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Equo joined the coalition on May 12, 2016, making the official logo, but check it in the Wikipedia in Spanish.--Carlitoscarlos (talk) 09:36, 15 May 2016 (UTC).

Before I added another person put the logo but did not correctly and was not quality so the latest edition is mine.--Carlitoscarlos (talk) 09:42, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!--Fjsalguero (talk) 05:17, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Spain 2000/Democracia Nacional

Oh Impru20 I did not know that Spain 2000 has said they will not run in this year elections, just wondering is Democracia Nacional running. Timjones86 (talk) 09:45, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Unidos Podemos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Castile (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:34, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Jo Di opinion polls

Hi, I just saw you edit message for the Greek opinion polls page. I don't think it is a legitimate one, the first reason is the logo of Golden Dawn, they have replaced it by a swastika... the second reason is that on the graphic it says (under the main title) "The opinion poll was conducted electronically between 5 - 8 June on the www.easypolls.net website with a sample of 5,512 persons." Going to the website it seems anyone can create a poll without any control on the "demographics" of the voters... Orgyn (talk) 09:47, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I have found the tweet where they ask their readers to vote: https://twitter.com/jodigraphics15/status/739563906696421376 https://twitter.com/jodigraphics15/status/739784675481255936 https://twitter.com/jodigraphics15/status/740234700564922368 https://twitter.com/jodigraphics15/status/740520043990126592 Orgyn (talk) 09:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:A la valenciana logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:A la valenciana logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Elecciones España 2015

Hola, te hablo en español porqué tengo más fluidez. Creo que en el articulo de las elecciones en inglés no es totalmente irrelevante poner las multiplicaciones, ya que el lector puede ver con claridad que todas las circunscripciones que hay en dicha línea tienen el número de diputados que se indica en la columna de la izquierda. Es mi humilde opinión, un saludo --Español34 (talk) 12:11, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Copyediting for Spanish general election, 2016

Hi Impru, I agree with your revert regarding the fragmented parliament - the original sentence doesn't sound natural to me but I agree that my edit didn't help! So I agree to leave that one for now.

However, "at stake" is the wrong phrase for the first paragraph - it's a bit emotive and not as specific as "up for election". I'm gonna change it back.

Also, just to let you know I intend to copyedit the rest of the article too when I have time, as I've noticed several grammatical errors. Hope you don't mind! Great work on the article by the way - I wish someone would do the same on the other elections I'm interested in! Jdcooper (talk) 18:33, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

German polling tables

I could say the exact same thing for you. I made an edit and explained it, while you failed to come up with a single argument against – and just plainly reverted it. While it's clear that you took my "ownership" accusation personally – for that, I'm sorry – I was referring to a previous edit war we've been through on the French polling page, where you also repeatedly altered the layout of the table to suit what appears to be your preferred layout. Hence my accusation. Though like I said, I take it back as it was needlessly blunt. I stand by my point that the new version is easier to read, and unless you have major objections, and a better argument than "it makes comparison more weird", I'll change it back. Μαρκος Δ (talk) 21:24, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

German opinion polls

Hi, I've been very busy lately.. would you mind updating the polling results here? I will update the graph. Would much appreciate it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_German_federal_election — Preceding unsigned comment added by KevinNinja (talk • contribs) 01:42, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 27 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

La gráfica de encuestas en las elecciones de anteayer

Buenas, Impru. ¿No sería mejor que el gráfico de las estimaciones de voto fuese únicamente hasta los resultados del 26-J y no hasta el 20-D? Así está demasiado desaprovechado el espacio, vaya. Un saludo y, enhorabuena por tu trabajo en los artículos electorales. Asturkian (talk) 13:03, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Spanish general election, 2016

On 29 June 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Spanish general election, 2016, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:35, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015–16 Spanish government formation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ETA. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Creating an aggregate polling graph for the next Slovenian election

Hey!

I've been trying to create a wiki page for the next Slovenian election polling as a summer pet project, seeing that there wasn't one already, and was asking around Wikipedia about creating one of those neat aggregate polling graphs you see on many election polling articles. I was advised to contact the author of one of the graphs, and seeing that you've created many a graph before, I was wondering if you'd be willing to create one for the article I'm working on or give me some advice on how to create one myself.

This is how far I've gotten; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jakob_tekavec/sandbox . I intent to submit it for publication after I manage to add the aggregate polling graph and make some further edits.

Thank you in advance. Kind regards, Jakob tekavec (talk) 15:22, 18 July 2016 (UTC)Jakob Tekavec

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ávila (Spanish Congress Electoral District), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ávila (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Italian constitutional referendum

Hi Impru20, how are you? As it happend many times in the past months, I have a request for you...could you create a graph about the Italian constitutional referendum, 2016 opinion polls? Maybe considering only Yes/No vote. Thank you very much and have a good day! -- Nick.mon (talk) 15:51, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jaén (Spanish Congress Electoral District), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Linares and Jaén (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 22 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:28, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 28 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:40, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Asturian Socialist Federation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Sama
Asturian parliamentary election, 2015 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Spanish

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

How do you do it?

Do you use a script to insert poll data? Because you do a lot of work remarkably fast! Thanks for updating poll results, by the way! KevinNinja (talk) 01:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Alavese Unity (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Regionalism
Pilar Zabala Artano (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Tolosa

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Basque parliamentary election, 2016

Como politólogo profesional Juan José Dominguez colabora en diversos medios como analista. Tiene metodología propia, no es un simple opinador. Aquí te pongo ejemplos de varias fuentes que mencionan su profesionalidad:

Espero haberte aclarado tus dudas.--85.85.85.69 (talk) 18:46, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Spanish Socialist Workers' Party, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Óscar López (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:57, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

PSOE Leadership Crisis

Hi Impru, Ok I will do! Thanks for all the great content, it's very interesting. I live in Spain but my Spanish is not quite good enough to read newspapers comfortably, so you are my main news source! Jdcooper (talk) 09:45, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean about <ouster> reversion. Really happy with the whole, just thought I would improve the sense of it. Stoorybrig (talk) 12:51, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Javier Fernández Fernández ‎

Hi Javier Fernández Fernández ‎is not SG but he is president of comeetee and for that, he is leader of the party. And according to the constitution, the leader of PSOE is head of opposition. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:07, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

JFF head the executive commeetee, so for that, he rules the party. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:15, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 2 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Líder de la oposición

Hola, Impru20. Perdón por el desajuste de la tabla de esta tarde, pero intenté cuadrarla por todos los medios y no fui capaz de resolver el lío de ninguna manera. Confiaba en que aparecieras pronto y supieras arreglarla, como así ha sido.

  • Las referencias sitúan los comienzos de Borrell como líder de la oposición en diferentes momentos ([2], [3]), debido a la complicada situación de bicefalia en la que se encontraba el partido. Sin embargo, creo que lo más acertado es considerar su inicio al frente de este cargo no oficial en el momento en el que fue elegido candidato a la presidencia.
  • He dado por hecho que la dimisión de Felipe González y la creación de la Comisión Gestora presidida por De Carvajal se produjo el 21 de mayo de 1979, pero no puedo asegurar con total seguridad que estos hechos se dieran ese día. Puede que ambas cosas ocurrieran el 20 del mismo mes.
  • Sobre Marcelino Oreja, albergo serias dudas de que en algún momento fuera líder de la oposición. Nunca he considerado que lo fuera y tampoco encuentro referencias que lo justifiquen, cuando en ningún momento fue líder del partido ni candidato a la presidencia del Gobierno. Es cierto que Historia Electoral así aparece, pero creo que deberíamos apoyarnos en alguna fuente más sólida, fiable y que fuera a ser posible de la época. Esta misma web no recoge por ejemplo a Herrero de Miñón como jefe de la oposición, cuando desempeñó esta función de forma bastante más clara. Lo mismo ocurre con De Carvajal o Chaves. En principio, no estoy de acuerdo con su inclusión.
  • Sobre cuestiones meramente formales, me gustaría saber si hay alguna opción de que el recuadro de Calvo-Sotelo como presidente ocupe la mitad del espacio correspondiente a la segunda casilla de Felipe González como jefe de la oposición. También, consultar la posibilidad de que la fina barra con el color de los partidos no se interrumpa en los límites de cada casilla, sino que forme un continuo cuando determinado partido tuviera dicha continuidad histórica (por ejemplo, que Rubalcaba, Sánchez y Fernández aparezcan bajo una misma barra sin interrupciones.

Un saludo y gracias por tu atención y ayuda. --HermanHn (talk) 22:58, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Normalmente, lo más habitual ha sido ver a Fraga ocupando la jefatura de la oposición en 1989. Es verdad que ya estaba en el carril de salida, y que eso choca en parte con la situación de los líderes que nombras (no hay duda de que Aznar, Rajoy o Rubalcaba fueron líderes de la oposición antes de liderar sus propios partidos), pero, ante esa especie de vacío, pienso que seguramente sea quien aún ocupaba la presidencia del partido quien deba aparecer en su lugar. Sobre todo cuando no hay una alternativa clara y la situación de Marcelino Oreja es cuando menos endeble. No encuentro ninguna referencia más que le ponga en ese papel, más allá de su condición de posible delfín (como ha habido tantos otros). Es más, el líder parlamentario del partido en ese momento parecía ser Herrero de Miñón ([4]), circunscrito a la actividad de la formación en el Congreso. Y la presidencia del correspondiente grupo parlamentario tampoco garantiza nada, como puede verse en el caso de Almunia durante el periodo de Borrell; tampoco la condición de diputado (Hernández Mancha no lo era). En fin, el análisis no es fácil, pero creo que yo no pondría a Oreja. --HermanHn (talk) 00:07, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Algo que no comparto en absoluto y que espero que pueda ser replanteado es la inclusión de Pablo Iglesias como jefe paralelo de la oposición. Puede que algún día lo sea, pero actualmente no lo es. Nunca lo ha sido. Es verdad que recientemente se ha autoasignado ese papel, pero no se puede dejar esa consideración en manos del político que decida arrogársela. Tampoco es la primera vez que ocurre; lo hizo incluso cuando Podemos aún era un partido extraparlamentario ([5], [6]). Se trata de una mera cuestión dialéctica, de marketing político que no puede tener una plasmación enciclopédica. El líder de la oposición es aquella persona que encabeza el primer partido de la oposición, ni más ni menos. Por eso, no tengo ninguna duda al catalogar a Javier Fernández pese a su situación interina, puesto que se trata de la máxima autoridad del PSOE y del interlocutor válido de Mariano Rajoy en este partido, al menos a día de hoy. --HermanHn (talk) 00:51, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Hola, Impru20. No estoy de acuerdo con la decisión de retirar a Fernández de la tabla. Pese a la abstención del PSOE, cosa que complica un poco más las cosas puesto que nunca se había producido hasta el momento y lo imprevisible de la situación en la que se encuentra este partido, lo cierto es que sigue formando parte del bloque de la oposición, siendo además la primera formación del mismo a no ser que se produzca un buen número de bajas en su grupo parlamentario. Y Javier Fernández no deja de ser su líder, aunque lo sea con carácter interino como otros muchos de sus predecesores. Habrá que ver lo que ocurre con el liderazgo del PSOE y el trato que dan los medios de comunicación a Pablo Iglesias, pero creo que lo más probable es que el secretario general que salga del próximo Congreso del PSOE termine siendo considerado líder de la oposición. De la misma forma, Fernández lo es ahora pese a la reivindicación de Podemos. De hecho, ha asignado públicamente ese papel a su propio partido ([7]), por lo que debería aparecer mencionado como líder de la oposición quien actúa como cabeza de la formación de forma provisional. En cualquier caso, creo que la fórmula adoptada hasta este momento era adecuada y mostraba información sobre la situación política y la rivalidad en este puesto con una gran fidelidad, por lo que me inclino por volver a ella. Eso sí, yo no diría que Pablo Iglesias tiene ese papel de líder desde el 7 de octubre (uno de los muchos momentos en los que ha reclamado para sí ese rol), sino que me inclinaría por el momento en el que el PSOE quedó sin secretario general o bien por el día de hoy, en el que Rajoy será previsiblemente investido.
En relación a Fraga, y sin contar con una total certeza, creo que lo más prudente y acertado es su inclusión como líder de la oposición hata la llegada de Aznar, como ahora aparece. Herrero de Miñón era únicamente el líder parlamentario, como Antonio Hernando en el actual PSOE, y Oreja era un hipotético sucesor que no llegó a serlo. Si bien, creo que no estaría de más mencionar la situación de ambos en una nota al pie.
Por último, creo que sería acertado incluir también a los líderes de la oposición durante la Segunda República. Es una idea que se me acaba de ocurrir y todavía no he estudiado suficiente las circunstancias de la época en lo que a este tema se refiere, pero tengo idea de hacerlo en breve y determinar quiénes ocuparon este cargo no oficial. Un saludo. --HermanHn (talk) 15:18, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Bueno, digamos que no me parece del todo incorrecta la decisión de considerar vacante el puesto en dichas situaciones y, eso sí, nombrar al dirigente de turno que lideraba al partido de forma interina. Sigo pensando que, puestos a considerar cuál es el líder de la oposición, este debe ser el que desempeña oficial y provisionalmente la función de principal autoridad del partido, es decir, Javier Fernández. Pero, como digo, apuesto por aceptar la configuración que has fijado. De hecho, me gustaría tarsladarla a la Wikipedia en nuestra lengua, dadas las carencias que presenta la tabla actual, pero creo que me voy a encontrar con la oposición de otros usuarios, especialmente en lo que se refiere a la catalogación de Pablo Iglesias como tal (algo que, por otra parte, me sigue generando dudas notables). Lo que sí creo es que, a pesar de que el puesto se encuentre vacante por falta de líder o provisionalidad del mismo, podría aparecer el nombre del principal partido de la oposición en el correspondiente recuadro. --HermanHn (talk) 17:49, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Not the first and I imagine not the last Barnstar for your extensive and extremely high-quality coverage of Spanish politics! You should be proud of both 2015-16 Spanish government formation and 2016 PSOE crisis, among the best English-language news sources on the web! Muchas gracias! Jdcooper (talk) 09:37, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

First Rajoy Cabinet

Hi It haven't made sense to divide the composition between composition and caretaker because it is the same. Reagrds. --Panam2014 (talk) 11:59, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Comment

You may well indicate that protocolary recognition in the lead, but not as an office in the infobox because it is not an office and you mislead readers into thinking there is such thing in Spain as there is in the UK or Catalonia.--Asqueladd (talk) 22:19, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Such thing exists, but not as an office to hold.--Asqueladd (talk) 22:23, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
I don't see sources that verify "Leader of the Opposition" is an actual office and that Sánchez was appointed for it and when he ceased to hold that office. Surely that information should be featured in the Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales. I suggest you to search for it in there and I wish you good luck too.--Asqueladd (talk) 22:28, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
I don't see myself ranting that much actually. Maybe you are projecting?--Asqueladd (talk) 22:30, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
You need to acknowledge what an office actually is. It is not necessarily about downplaying the thing; the case we are dealing is not an "office" but a protocolary recognition (yeah, with privileges), probably notable for the lead, but not an office to include in the infobox. I have indicated you the place to look for evidences for that thing to be an office and to look for the extent of the term of Mr. Sánchez in it. Hint: offices in Spain are sworn upon.--Asqueladd (talk) 22:41, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
Putting the burden of the proof on me. Not cool. You need to prove he swore an office, when he assumed that office, et. al. I've already told you the place to search for it is the Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales. Cheers.--Asqueladd (talk) 22:49, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

PDPC

Yes, the coalition it's not registered anymore, but we could search the official results published in the Ministry of the Interior website ;) (http://www.infoelectoral.interior.es/min/busquedaAvanzadaAction.html and selecting the Congress election of 1977), in which you could clearly see that the acronym given to Pacte Democratic per Catalunya was PDPC and not PDC. --Sfs90 (talk) 18:40, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Second Rajoy Government

Hello Impru20! I want to clarify why you are translating Ministerio de la Presidencia y para las Administraciones Territoriales as Minister for the Presidency and of the Regional Administrations. On the revision history page, you first pointed out that translations are taken from La Moncloa website, which I think is a perfectly valid criteria. The thing is La Moncloa website uses "of" as the preposition in all instances, and Ministerio de la Presidencia y para las Administraciones Territoriales in particular is translated as Ministry of the Presidency and of the Regional Administrations. Then I made changes following the same criteria, but you reverted them pointing out consistency with previous cabinets, and basically introduced the "for" preposition intead of "of" in all instances save for "of the Regional Administrations". If La Moncloa website's English denominations for the current cabinet use the same preposition on both ends in the denomination of this ministry – Ministry of the Presidency and of the Regional Administrations –, isn't it more consistent to translate it as Ministry for the Presidency and for the Regional Administrations on both accounts? Baskesc (talk) 22:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Impru20! Baskesc (talk) 08:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Impru20. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Program

How to make the graphs about the intention to vote, Impro20? With what program? I would like to help you, but I wanted to do the same design as you. Thank you very much and answer me when you can! --Oriololmo (talk) 16:44, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Graph of the Next Italian general election

Hi Impru20, how are you? Could you update the opinion polls' graph about the Next Italian general election? From July to December, lot of things had changed, please update it :) -- Nick.mon (talk) 10:28, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Impru20/Archive_6&oldid=1141801993"