Talk:2017 Catalan independence referendum/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Reverts from BallenaBlanca

@BallenaBlanca: you made a revert of my edits without giving much explanation. I will give a couple of reasons to explain why I think my modifications improve the article:

• They order the events in chronological order.
• In your edit, it's not clear when was the voter shot. Reading your text I would assume he was shot when he threw a fence against the police, but that's not what sources and footage show, he was shot later when he had nothing in his hands and when he was 10-15 meters away from the police officer.

By the way, given that we are having this discussion here, I would also remove "harassing, insulting" from the sentence. I doubt a person insulting a police officer is relevant for Wikipedia (and harassing is such a broader term...). I left those words in my edit because I recognize that's very subjective, but I really think they should be removed per WP:BALASP. --Aljullu (talk) 14:26, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Aljullu Thanks for your input, probably you are right in at least part of your observations. Tomorrow I will look at it calmly and I will explain why I reverted, what is the important content that you deleted. Do not worry, we will reach an agreement. --BallenaBlanca 🐳 ♂ (Talk) 00:59, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, @Aljullu: I have not forgotten this, other issues are keeping me busy. I'll try to take time tomorrow. Best regards. --BallenaBlanca 🐳 ♂ (Talk) 22:40, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

With your edit you removed “the other for unrelated causes.” ; that the man injured in the eye participated in hurling fences and harassing the police “among them the man who was subsequently injured in the eye” and that the police shooted rubber balls because they were cornered, to break through and not only because the protesters were throwing objects at them “and how finding themselves cornered by the crowd, the agents shooted rubber balls to make their way and be able to get out of there.”

The context of how there is contradictory information between the statements of the four witnesses and the man injured and the facts that are seen in the footage was also lost.

After reading it again, IMO the chronological order is clear. You say that "Reading your text I would assume he was shot when he threw a fence against the police, but that's not what sources and footage show" but my text says "among them the man who was subsequently injured in the eye". First I thought that the term "subsequently" was misused and seemed to indicate closer proximity to the facts, but I see that not, in the same way that the page says above that the injured man "subsequently sued 3 members of the Spanish National Police" referring to a very later event, not occurred at the same time of the impact of the rubber ball.

I am going to erase "insulting" but it IMO is valid to leave harassing, in the same way that the article cites police violence 26 times.

Let me know your opinion. --BallenaBlanca 🐳 ♂ (Talk) 12:40, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

@BallenaBlanca:

you removed “the other for unrelated causes.”

Right, I removed it to make the text easier to read (and because it didn't add any information). But feel free to add that again.

“among them the man who was subsequently injured in the eye”

I doubt that's relevant, since both events happened in different places and at a different time, but again, I have nothing against adding that to the text.

“and how finding themselves cornered by the crowd, the agents shooted rubber balls to make their way and be able to get out of there.”

Some police officers might have started shooting when they were cornered, but that's not the case when they shot the victim, footage shows there were almost as many police officers as voters at that moment. But again, I don't have anything against adding that information too if you think it's relevant.

So, if don't say the opposite, I will rewrite that part ordering the events in chronological order and adding your points. --Aljullu (talk) 16:50, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Given that nobody expressed any objection in the last month and a half, I proceeded implementing these changes and adding more info and references to that paragraph. --Aljullu (talk) 14:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

I made some small adjustments, because you deleted important information again, and a reference. --BallenaBlanca 🐳 ♂ (Talk) 18:32, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Number of police officers injured

Since the day of the referendum, the Spanish Ministry of the Interior has given three different numbers about the police officers injured:

• 1st of October 2017: 39 [1]
• 2nd of October 2017: 431 [2]
• 20th of April 2018: 111 [3] [4] [5] [6]

Considering the last number is the last official update given by the Spanish government, I think that's the number that must be used everywhere in the article. In the section Violence and injuries we also mention the previous number given by the government, but the latest one should take preference because the number from 2nd of October was amended later by the same government.

@Arcillaroja: I have reverted your edits and added one new reference. Please, bring the discussion here if you think this is wrong. --Aljullu (talk) 14:25, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Arcillaroja (talk) 13:49, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Mention of boycott and support for staying in Spain

This page lacks any section on the boycott of the vote by anti-independence groups and only briefly mentions "asked citizens not to participate" as a counter opinion to allegations of mass vote suppression. Similar pages for Puerto Rican referendums mention boycotts as an important element, so this page should add such information to avoid giving the wrong impression about the vote. Supporters of remaining in Spain overwhelmingly avoided the polls, leading to a low turnout. Catalonia did not overwhelmingly support independence, voters who participated in the referendum did. Though police actions are an important element of the referendum story, this article generally gives the impression of a fight between the unified, pro-independence people vs. aggressive authorities. This ignores the large section of Catalan's population that opposes independence and does not fairly represent their interest in the referendum and ensuing political events. [7] [8] [9] 128.239.50.168 (talk) 06:33, 29 March 2019 (UTC)