Jump to content

Talk:Catalan Courts

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Catalan Courts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:36, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Catalan Courts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:31, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of Arms

[edit]

Obviously any coat of arms depicted in the infobox of an article implies that that coat of arms is the one identifying the main subject of the page. This is not true in this page: the King had a coat of arms, the Courts didn't. If the Courts decided to include the symbol in their seal, as a gesture of allegiance to the king, that should be explained in a section (with sources), NOT in the infobox, where it can only be a means to push a Catalan nationalist agenda, according to which the four bars were a Catalan symbol from its origin, an unproven and non-neutral theory. --Jotamar (talk) 18:16, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jotamar, nobody talked about Catalan nationalism here or claim for Catalan (or Aragonese) origins of the bars so, first of all, stop to see ghosts. If you search in other medieval parliament pages in Wikipedia (i remember Scotland, England or some diets of Germany) you will see its infoboxes decorated with the arms of its lord, even when the Parliament wasn't any kind of proper arms. Is just an informal convention, and even with that, remember that the Courts in Aragon, Catalonia and Valencia were thecnically the councils of the king formed by the three (or four) estates of the respetive realms. That was a royal institution, and the symbol who represents the royal institutions were the symbol of the king, if they doesn't receive ex professo arms. So, there's no problem about the presence of the Arms of the king of Aragon in this infobox. I invite you to search the documentation of the courts and see the seal of the Catalan Courts, as I am unable to take a photo from those papers. Best regards, --81.33.220.29 (talk) 19:07, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As you surely know, WP is not a source of WP, and whatever happens in those pages you mention has no authority over the editions in this page. I guess adding a coat of arms might not be controversial in those pages, however it is controversial here, and one must be especially careful about infoboxes, where any information cannot be properly explained with all its nuances. I invite you to read this discussion to see what I mean. --Jotamar (talk) 15:45, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I readed the discussion long time ago, and it seems that you are almost the only user that defends the supression of the bars in the Kingdom of Aragon and the Principality of Catalonia (except in some issues in Aragon, which seems that you tolerate a coat of arms or the use of the bars in the County of Aragon as predecessor state of the kingdom) something absurd when even the Spanish Wikipedia uses the bars as a flag or insignia of the kingdom. As I can see, there's nothing controversial the exhibition of the highest royal emblem in a royal institution infobox, something unrelated with any kind of nationalism. Regards. --81.33.220.29 (talk) 16:08, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, you keep giving reasons why the shield can be included in the infobox. What I need is a reason why it should be included. As for me, I'm convinced there's at least one reason why it shouldn't be included: it can easily mislead readers into thinking that the bars were already the symbol of Catalonia in the Middle Ages, just as they are today (in practice). --Jotamar (talk) 16:21, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously, including a shield simply because there is an empty field in the infobox is not a good reason for me. --Jotamar (talk) 16:21, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’m new to this discussion, but interested. I don’t (yet) have an opinion, but just on general principles, I’d point out that WP:BURDEN calls for the person that wants to include something having to show reliable sources to support that view. Calling for something to be removed is not suppression, it’s simply part of Verifiability policy to avoid including anything that is not supported and has been challenged. Seems to me the discussion should hinge on what support is available to demonstrate the use of the shield by the Corts, or by reliable sources when clearly discussing the Corts. Mathglot (talk) 20:04, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catalan_Courts&oldid=1206576240"