![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 6 November 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Really? How neutral is that? I suppose the criticism section isn't enough. Can we have an atrocities section on the USA page to maintain fairness or would that be going to far? The US has certainly massacred far more for far less reason... 82.77.99.92 ( talk) 23:13, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
it seems nine articles link to this one, so i'm removing the tag that complains about few articles linking to it. Murderbike 05:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Neutrality no real sources except anarchist stories which although do defiently have an element of truth are severley distorted firstly to show anarchists as the "only true revolutionaries" also idolises the anarchists in the spanish civil war which although being part of the movement were not the runners of the movement for reasons more then "stalin was autocratic" overall this article seems to be more of a tale of how great anarchism is as opposed to about anarchist catalonia, ironically based on a marxist slogan.
Citations Needed. The lack of any cited references at all in this articleis a little worrying. I cannot speak to the validity of this article (I do not know enough about the subject), but it cannot be taken as correct until changes are made. Drivas 14:30, 05 August 2008 (GMT+1)
Many of the citations are taken from blogs, which are inadmissable. There are a couple from random pamphlets: also not admissible (need to be published in a peer-reviewed journal or mass-circulating media outlet, or best of all a book by a respected non-vanity publisher. BillMasen ( talk) 13:30, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, but I'm talking about the citations which were added a few days ago, replacing the cite tags which I had previously put there. BillMasen ( talk) 17:58, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Another thing: what about the murder visited by the Anarchists upon those considered to be "burgeois" or upon religious people? I'm not signing up to the NKVD version of events, but the CNT weren't exactly whiter than white, either.
One source which mentions all this is 'The Spanish Cockpit', by Franz Borkenau (a book which is mostly critical of the Communists). Unfortunately I don't have access to this book any more. Can someone who does point out that opposition to the anarchists was not entirely motivated by economic self-interest or kowtowing to moscow, but also by the "bourgeoisie" wishing to save their own lives? BillMasen ( talk) 13:30, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
I have replaced the most egregious refs with fact tags. Strict adherence to WP:RS would permit far more.
I am not talking about refs that have been there since pre-WP:RS. I mean refs which have been added in place of the fact tags I put there a few months ago.
Other open-content encyclopedias, anarchist blogs, and self-published pamphlets are not suitable for anything except citing the authors' opinions. Even they may not be appropriate for inclusion.
I've got a copy of Spanish Cockpit, so will be contributing more to this article very soon. BillMasen ( talk) 15:31, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
The article is full of pro-Anarchist misinformation. See this. Drama-kun ( talk) 11:23, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree. You should have seen what it looked like before I had a go at it. BillMasen ( talk) 12:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
FYI, claiming bias in the article and then using an article by Brian Caplan as the basis for that claim of bias, is, well, stupid. -- 121.220.176.50 ( talk) 10:24, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Once again, the fact tags have been replaced with either incomplete or unreliable references.
See WP:RS
Self-published sources, including
are definitely not acceptable in this case. See WP:selfpub for instances where they are acceptable.
Since there is obviously a problem with sources on this page, which is very long-standing, I am removing references which do not cite page numbers. It is essential to verify statements, and an article which repeatedly cites the "sources" above has lost the benefit of the doubt.
There are a large number of contentious, uncited claims on this page. There is no excuse for this; the article may have been written a long time ago, but the concerns I raised over a year ago have not been addressed. If there is no improvement in sourcing, I will delete all of the tagged statements in two week's time. BillMasen ( talk) 11:38, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
In reference to the current 3rd citation, "^Pawns in the Game, 1958, by the former Intelligence Branch (Canadian Forces) agent William Guy Carr." There is a book such titled in the Bodleian Library (a copy-right library). The only information I can get is:
* Title: Pawns in the game * Publisher Details: Willowdale * Creation Date: [c.1965].] * Language: Undetermined * Author: William Guy Carr * Source: OLIS * Type: Book * Snippet: Pawns in the game
Cannot confirm if the cited sentence can actually be sourced to the book. Note the supposed date of publication differs to that offered by the original editor. -- 129.67.121.82 ( talk) 13:08, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:BoyIberianAnarchistFederationGTaro.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 15:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC) |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Revolutionary Catalonia. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Myself and Mangokeylime have been discussing the use of the Former country infobox at Talk:Free Derry, and I think the same arguments apply here. This article is not really a "country" article like, for instance, United States, which has sections for geography, demographics (including languages), government etc. An infobox summarises this information from the article. This article doesn't have this kind of information. There is no infobox designed to summarise an article like this, because the article is essentially a chronology. The Military conflict infobox wouldn't really work either, as the article is not primarily about battles, armies and leaders. It falls between two stools, for infobox purposes. Some articles just don't lend themselves to infoboxes, and I think this is one of them. Scolaire ( talk) 10:16, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
it an anarchist friendly pamphlet that is supposed to a Wikipedia neutral article. George Orwell is not a rs but his propaganda opinions are cited all the time. Αντικαθεστωτικός ( talk) 16:18, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't understand. What exactly is the problem with using Orwell as a source? The article clearly uses quotations from CNT members, Orwell wasn't even an anarchist. Also, as someone who has read Homage to Catalonia, the book is actually very objective, and doesn't paint a perfect picture of the anarchists. I don't have the time to look at every single quotation rn, but I don't understand why some of his quotes were even deleted. Especially the first one which simply describes the scene he found when he arrived at Barcelona. The fact that the revolutionaries collectivized large parts of the economy and placed related imagery is indisputable. Why remove something like this? PantMal ( talk) 10:36, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
The citogenesis affair with the article about the so-called " Free Territory" (see talk page discussion) got me thinking whether the term "Revolutionary Catalonia" had a historical basis in the sources.
I looked through the ones available to me and, sure enough, three of them (Alexander 1999, p. 754; Graham 2002, p. 221; Paz 1996, p. 512) do use this term. However, all three of them only use the term once each, and in the vast majority of my sources, no reference is made to a "Revolutionary Catalonia" - indicating that it isn't a common name.
Most of my sources use the simple term " Catalonia", without any adjectives, but obviously this wouldn't fit for an article title. Another term that is used is " Autonomous Catalonia" (Paz 1996, p. 339; Peirats 1998, p. 80), or the " autonomous region of Catalonia" (Bolloten 1991, p. 386), however these terms also may not disambiguate well with the present-day autonomous community. Another option is " Republican Catalonia" (Alexander 1999, p. 148), which disambiguates better, but isn't even as common as the current title.
Also note that the articles on Spanish Wikipedia and Catalan Wikipedia are titled " Anarcho-syndicalism in Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War".
Just wanted to bring this up here and see if anyone has proposals for changing the article's title, or if they think we should leave it as is. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 14:35, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Is their appearance in Hoi4 in the article, if not I believe it should seeing as it’s one of the only games they are in. 165.234.101.96 ( talk) 19:55, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
I don't really think it's fair to describe Catalonia after 8th of May 1937 as revolutionary, as the power of CNT-FAI was greatly diminished and POUM was outlawed. The Spanish Revolution article doesn't really mention any events after July 1937 either. My suggestion would be to change the timeline of Revolutionary Catalonia to 21st of July 1936, the day of the establishment of the CCMA, to 8th of May 1937, the end of the Maydays. CNT-FAI still had power after this, and still one minister in the Generalitat, but they weren't really the dominant force in Catalonia any longer. What do y'all think? Any sources I could use for this? Amalthea Little ( talk) 10:20, 1 June 2023 (UTC)