Talk:Pablo Hasél

WP:MANDY

This is a Wikipedia guideline which is usually used for people who deny being white supremacists or Nazis when all the media sources say they are, and I think the same logic can be used here. I have been alerted of a personal video in which Hasél denies the allegations of praising Al Qaeda, but the amount of sources that say this mean that WP:MANDY applies here. La Vanguardia (Catalanist newspaper), El Periodico (left-wing Catalanist newspaper), Diari di Girona (Catalan local paper), Ara (Catalanist newspaper), Público (practically Spain's Salon.com or Jacobin), EFE (Spain's AP). This is clearly not a smear from right-wing sources. Unknown Temptation (talk) 16:23, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Repeating false information several times does not make it true.

These newspapers are obviously just copying information. Each time it is the same armed groups that are cited, always in the same order. However, Pablo Hasel has publicly proclaimed his support for many other organizations claiming to be Marxist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laconfe (talk • contribs) 17:44, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

You have no evidence that this is false rather than your own assertions. Spain has a law against false accusations [1]. What is it, all of the sources are lying or Hasél is speaking for himself. However I'm tired of this so if anything I will ask for community involvement. Unknown Temptation (talk) 19:05, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

If we are saying that all of these sources are wrong, then we may as well delete the article because it's cited completely from news outlets. What do you suggest we cite it from instead? Hasél himself? Unknown Temptation (talk) 19:13, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Third Opinion: It is the policy of Wikipedia that even adequately sourced information cannot be included without consensus. See WP:ONUS which is part of the Verifiability Policy: "While information must be verifiable to be included in an article, not all verifiable information needs to be included in an article. Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article, and that it should be omitted or presented instead in a different article. The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content." (Emphasis added.) See also WP:NOCONSENSUS from the consensus policy: "for contentious matters related to living people, a lack of consensus often results in the removal of the contentious matter, regardless of whether the proposal was to add, modify or remove it." So the short answer here is, clearly, that the reference to Al Qaeda should be omitted until consensus is established for its inclusion. As to the sourcing issue, I do not have an opinion as to the acceptability of the cited sources, but that can be worked out when other editors are brought in to establish consensus, if the consensus is to include it. (And assistance on sourcing issues may be obtained from Reliable Sources Noticeboard.) If the sources prove to be reliable, then the reliability of the countersource should also be considered and if both sides are deemed reliable, then Wikipedia does not decide which is right. Instead both sides of the issue should be set out, with their supporting reliable sources, in the article. Finally, WP:MANDY is an essay and has no force or effect as a "rule" or standard in Wikipedia. One may argue that what said in an essay makes sense and ought be be the way things are, but that's nothing more than an argument with no more force or effect than any other argument made by an editor. Finally, understand that Third Opinions are not binding, they are not a tiebreaker, and do not "count" for consensus: they're just an opinion. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:26, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok. Frankly I don't think any more editors are going to join this debate about a relatively minor figure, and I'm definitely not going to go to noticeboards and wikiprojects in an attempt to get these two words into the article. The world is not going to end by Wikipedia being one source not mentioning this. I thank transporter man for moderating Unknown Temptation (talk) 13:21, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

I have included Hasél's response video. This is because the quotes needed to cite the support of the other groups says the A-Q word (nine times) so the word was still on the page, and I believe in right to response. If I did not include the response video, the only other option would be removing those sources completely. Unknown Temptation (talk) 14:01, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

That's smear. Pablo Hasél words: “Obama es otro títere pintado como El Mesías. Pero a la CIA nunca le importó toda la humanidad que perecía. Al Qaeda fue creada por la CIA, todos lo saben. Tiene un nuevo logo entrama, llámale Obama Bin Laden. Mientras el Papa al Dios del capital el invoca.- ¡Yes, we fuck you! La represión nos asola. Pero grito: merece una bomba Televisión Española!” and “the Bourbon gangster is carousing with the Saudi monarchy that finances ISIS” --87.170.198.81 (talk) 15:34, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

"Spanish" or "Catalan" rapper?

Irrespective of what Pablo did or did not do: shouldn't Wikipedia respect self-defined national identity? You would not call Bobby Sands British (and he was a convicted violent offender). So why is Pablo Hasél called Spanish and not Catalan? If a non-primary source is needed for calling him Catalan, here it is: https://int.assemblea.cat/news/catalan-pablo-hasel-imprisoned-lyrics-against-spanish-monarchy/

Moreover, precedents abound. Nicola Sturgeon is listed as a Scottish politician, not British. Joanna Cherry, a member of the British Parliament, is also listed as Scottish and not British. (This is not the place to discuss controversies related to these politicians). Lewis Capaldi, a singer like Pablo, is also listed as Scottish and not British. Scotland is a self-governing entity, so is Catalonia. By this same standard Pablo is a Catalan rapper.

I will make the edit tomorrow unless there is a clear argument to the contrary, taking into account the precedents I cited. Calling him Catalan is mere respect for identity and does not prejudge whether he was or was not guilty of any crime. Ramendik (talk) 17:17, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Do what you want, Lleida is in Catalonia which is in Spain so any one of those is correct. But the great majority of neutral foreign sources call him Spanish [2] [3] [4] just for examples in three other languages. Unknown Temptation (talk) 19:00, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Ramendik, "Catalan" is a much better term to use here. The examples Ramendik gives clearly state how citizenship is not the only deciding factor, and that local identities must also be taken into account. The fact that Hasél is Catalan is a key aspect of his case, and his situation cannot be correctly analyzed if we ignore the current political situation in Catalonia. The edit that removed the mention "Catalan" justified itself on two accounts: MOS:ETHNICITY and that Twitter is not a source, both principles being used incorrectly here. The Manual of Style explicitly states that "Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.", yet, as already said, Hasél's status as a Catalan is nearly always cited as a key element in his case and its interlationalization. Furthermore, the source was not simply a tweet, but a statement from Jean Quatremer, one of the leading journalists on European politics. He was replying to Henry de Laguérie, a journalist specialized in Catalan politics, who specifically uses the adjective "catalan" to present Hasél [5]. These are not just tweets, but journalism from some of the best experts on the subject. Furthermore, the use of "Catalan" as a specific group identifier is nothing new on Wikipedia: {{Family name hatnote}} already has a Catalan parameter, distinct from the Spanish one, and the last three presidents of Catalonia – Aragonès, Torra, and Puigdemont – are all described in their introductions as "a Catalan politician/lawyer/journalist". Girrit (talk) 09:17, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I see the edit is made, thanks a lot. Ramendik (talk) 19:25, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Could you advice if it might be a good idea to add another reference for "Catalan" to avoid debates around Twitter? https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-spain-rights-rapper-idUKKBN2AH27N The problem is that "Catalan" is in the photo caption - how does one highlight this caption in the reference? Ramendik (talk) 19:29, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

I've added the new ref. I couldn't find a way to directly link to the image, so I just mentioned its contents in the ref itself. Girrit (talk) 20:37, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! Hope we have this settled now. Ramendik (talk) 22:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

I think Girrit's contribution [6] of Feb 19th has to be reviewed. Hasel is not imprisoned for the sake of being "Catalan", but rather because of the tweets he made, the lyrics of his songs, or an addition of some other previous penalties, which differ from the fact of him being Catalan or Catalan Independentist. Actually, he is very critic of the Catalan Independentist "proces". Let me also note that rigour should be applied at the time of defining facts such as "Nationality". While we agree that Hasel is a Catalan, his nationality is Spanish. Also, I think that adding such an entry as "Citizenship" does not contribute to create a neutral framework to the article.

Hello, the introduction you referenced to made no claim he was jailed for being Catalan but rather explicitly mentioned that it was due to his past declarations ("insulting [...] and praising [...]"). Him being an independentist was a referenced statement, and the song is no proof of the contrary: he is indeed very critical of the independence movement but does not state his opposition to it.

Concerning "Nationality/Citizenship": I came here actually wanting to bring up the question. It is a tricky subject, and a past proposition for the Manual of style on the subject failed to gain acceptance. For a number of specialists on the subject (such a Jorge Cagiao, who is well versed in Catalan nationalism), the state of the current page is correct: Hasel is a citizen of the Spanish state (so his citizenship is Spanish), but as an independentist identifies with the Catalan nation (so his nationality is Catalan). It is however common, especially for non specialists, to use the two terms interchangeably. In any case it is the object of frequent changes in the article.

I propose that we only have the line "Citizenship : Spanish" in the infobox, as this is not in question whatever one's point of view. His views on Spanish and Catalan nationalism, which seem at the least to be quite complicated, would be better discussed in detail in the article, rather reduced to a one-word label in the infobox.

Girrit (talk) 17:06, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Maybe you are mistaking my entry for the one of other user. As a result I've just created an username account, as Laocon.

What I want point is that Hasel is in jail not because of him being either a Catalan or a Catalan Independentist (otherwise thousands of people would be in prison and it is not happening), but rather he is imprisoned due to his words in social media (Twitter), the lyrics of some of his songs plus an accumulation of prior penalties that, summed to the first ones, have led him to jail. Stating something different to this is not respecting the neutrality of Wikipedia. On my side, having him in jail, I think it is totally unfair, but we should not confuse the debate about free speech with a debate on National pride or similar.

About your "Nationality/Citizenship" proposition in the infobox, while I respect your point of view, I think it might confuse the article with a debate on national feeling, that I think this is not the case. For this reason, I think the "Nationality" of him in the article has to be as neutral as possible, keeping the Spanish one, since by now, it is the one that Hasel has, and we should not add terms such as "citizenship", which leads to confusion to the lectors, since it looks like being added under biased criteria. If Catalonia happens to be independent and Pablo Hasel eventually obtains this nationality, then I think the "Nationality" entry in the infobox has to be updated. Otherwise, we would be entering into the abstract field of feelings and emotions, and I think Wikipedia is not the place for this. Laocon (talk) 09:30, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

@Laocon, Ramendik, and Unknown Temptation: I can't make sense of your first paragraph. The article at no point says he is in prison for being Catalan, so I don't see why you are claiming it is. It does mention that he is a Catalan, which is an objective fact and a key element of context for this article, as was stated above.

Concerning your second paragraph, I completely agree with you. But just as you say that the infobox must not confuse the reader, we should therefore avoid the use of the term "nationality" since it is ambiguous. Citizenship is however an clear non-ambiguous term in this context. Examples of where this has already been used are Carles Puigdemont and Oona Chaplin, both of which are Spanish citizens but don't necessarily exclusively identify with the Spanish nation.

Girrit (talk) 10:20, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

@GirritAbout your first paragraph, I agree with you. However, in what concerns to your second paragraph, I would adhere to the Wikipedia's definition on Nationality: ″Nationality is a legal identification of a person in international law, establishing the person as a subject, a national, of a sovereign state. It affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state against other states.″. Since Catalonia is, at is current state, a Comunidad autonoma, we cannot state that any person born in Catalonia has a Catalan nationality unless Catalonia becomes an independent state. Actually, if you have a look into the examples that you have provided, in other languages, such as French, German, Portuguese, Russian or Spanish, define both of them as individuals with Spanish nationality. Speaking of which, Puigdemont's most accurated "citizenship" at this moment would be Belgian Wallonian and I can't find any source or reference where Chaplin denies her identification with the Spanish nation. For this reason, I would keep the "Nationality: Spanish" in the infobox. Nevertheless, I would be open to include any reference in the infobox or somewhere else, if needed, to state Hasel's vision on "catalanity". Laocon (talk) 10:57, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

As it stands at the moment Catalan points to a disambiguation page - I think this should be piped to Catalans but there is a note saying "Do not change, see talk page discussion". The link to Paul] is also a dab page.— Rod ^talk 20:27, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes it is a mistake. It used to be piped to Catalonia, I propose that it go back to that version. For Paul I would pipe it to Paul (given name). Girrit (talk) 09:55, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

I think you can make a comparison to the UK where citizens are called Welsh, Scottish etc. I think it's also worth pointing out that Catalan is a recognized nationality in the Spanish Constitution.PailSimon (talk) 10:11, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

That is a good point. "Historic nationalities" are recognized by the Spanish constitution. Maybe we should keep the current 'Nationality: Catalan / Citizenship: Spanish" in the infobox. Girrit (talk) 22:02, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Several are the differences in between Spain and the UK, especially in what concerns the "nationality" term, firstly due to the fact that the UK is comprised by non-sovereign "countries" + dependencies + overseas territories, while Spain is only composed of "comunidades autonomas" (see Countries of the United Kingdom and Nationalities and regions of Spain). While a person born in Leeds can be identified as an English person, his nationality will legally be British (see British nationality law), the same criterion is applied to a person born in Galicia, Basque Country or Catalonia (see Spanish nationality law). In this case, we do can accept that Pablo Hasel is a Catalan ("historic nationality"), but his Nationality is undoubtedly Spanish. Laocon (talk) 11:23, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I also agree with @Laocon: as saying his nationality is "Catalan" is just ridiculous. There isn't anything such as Catalan Nationality. He's a Spaniard born in Spain from Spanish parents, so he's Spanish. Saying Catalans are not Spanish are politics and propaganda made by the pro-independence supporters as being Catalan is being Spanish, just as Galicians or Castilians. Can't compare this with the United Kingdom as Wales or Scotland are fully recognised countries, which are part of the UK, the sovereign state. Spain is a federation, the example can be done with Germany and Bavaria, Catalonia is an autonomous community not a country. Spain is not an union of countries like the UK, but a federation like Germany. --154.28.188.241 (talk) 07:19, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't know who is right here, but that's how you see it. What matters is not how you or I or any other editor sees it, but what independent reliable sources say. 331dot (talk) 07:28, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

• Comment. It's perfectly acceptable to refer to someone as "Catalan", just as it's acceptable to call someone "English", another nationality that doesn't exist - in the sense that "England" is not an independent self-governing state. It would also be acceptable to call someone a Catalan rapper on the basis that they use the Catalan language. Deb (talk) 08:40, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: I would adhere to the Wikipedia entry on Nationalities and regions of Spain or the Second Article of the Spanish Constitution of 1978 [7] as a reliable source. The Second Article of the Spanish Constitution of 1978 states that "The Constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish nation, the common and indivisible country of all Spaniards; it recognises and guarantees the right to autonomy of the nationalities and regions of which it is composed, and the solidarity amongst them all". Also, it is pretty interesting this paragraph found in the previous Wikipedia entry, about the debate on "nationality" vs "citizenship": "The particular meaning that the term "nationalities" was to acquire in Spanish politics, in reference to regions, created some confusion with the concept of "nationality" with regards to citizenship. The matter was especially confused when the latter was defined in the 11th article of the constitution. It was suggested that the term "nationality" be changed to "citizenship" in the 11th article, but it was considered that the terms nationality and citizenship are not completely synonymous, as it is common in other European legislations."

@Deb: To me is completely acceptable to refer to Hasel as a Catalan, Catalan born or whatsoever, whose nationality is Spanish, not because he feels Spanish or not, but rather because he is a Spanish national under the eyes of the international law, that happens to be a Catalan or that has born in Catalonia. Laocon (talk) 09:04, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Laocon: Not sure what you mean - do you mean that you now agree that Catalan is okay or that you still think Catalan isn't okay? Deb (talk) 09:09, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Deb: Since the very beginning I agreed to refer to Hasel as a Catalan, noting that being Catalan means being a Spanish national or holding the Spanish nationality, in the same way as it does being Murcian, Extremaduran, Asturian or Riojan, as it is reflected in the Spanish Constitution of 1978. I think I've made myself clear. Laocon (talk) 09:18, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

It follows that "English" is not a nationality. Deb (talk) 10:18, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Deb: I'm sorry, what do you mean? Laocon (talk) 11:00, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

• The Spanish Constitution is not binding on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 10:35, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: Under which criteria? Are you suggesting that the Spanish Constitution is not either a reliable or a published work? [8][9] Laocon (talk) 11:00, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: you won't find any "reliable source" saying his nationality is Catalan (as that doesn't exist) and the only website saying he's just Catalan is that website from above, Assemblea.cat, which is an active pro-independence organization that has an obviously biased point of view. Well after all they're free to manipulate as much as they want as they're a private organisation and it's neither a valid source. But now seriously, this guy was born in Spain from Spanish parents. Why do we even need a source to say he's Spanish? Where's the source saying Alizée is French? Or maybe we know it because it because of her origins? Same goes for all artists. Seriously... This is just a political biased thing to say he's not Spanish. --154.28.188.232 (talk) 11:05, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Nationality is not just a juridical term, it is also a sociological term, and the two have different meanings. The infobox does not let us distinguish between the two, putting "Nationality (political)" and "Nationality (sociological)" as different variables. We therefore need to find a more neutral term.

Furthermore, affirming that "his Nationality is undoubtedly Spanish" is simply not the case: the very existence of this debate attests against this. To add to this, the Spanish constitution includes the in-part-still-undefined notion of "Historic nationality", a quick Google search shows finds hundreds of books on the notion of nationality in Spain (examples [10][11][12][13]), etc.

Simply put, "nationality" is not a clear notion, and reducing it to its political aspect as defined by the Spanish judiciary might please Spanish nationalists (as repeated IP changes to the article have shown), but is at best an oversimplification if not overtly misleading. Let's use "citizenship": the option is there for a reason, and avoids the endless debates and ambiguity of "nationality" here.

Girrit (talk) 11:12, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

@Girrit: In this talk I have provided a very specific source to define what "Nation" is, under the eyes of international law, which is the Spanish Constitution and is especially related to this context. If you bring to this talk any concrete definition, under any reliable source that defines "Nation" as a sociological term, and which is applied to the sense of this article, for sure, I will be open to include this definition. Otherwise, we won't have any consensus and we'll be talking about personal opinions, which are acceptable, but not rigorous enough for the Wikipedia standards.

Under the eyes of international law, Hasel's nationality is undoubtedly Spanish. What's your criteria to state the opposite?

Yet I find pretty interesting the sources you've mentioned, in the way you have presented them, I found them pretty vague, so you should be more concrete to what you want to point. "Nacionalidad historica" is a pretty ambiguous term (that neither defines which "nacionalidades historicas" are nor filters them from what they are not), that is included in the 1978 Spanish Constitution, but it does not eventually awards no one with the privilege of any specific "nacionalidad historica", yet it does award the Spanish nationality in the article 2 and 11.

The debate on citizenship versus nationality, has been settled in the Spanish law by a voting passed in the Spanish Parliament in 1978, as the paragraph 4 of this source indicates: [14] Maybe we don't want to enact any Historical revisionism, don't we? Laocon (talk) 12:00, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

This last comment is not a little tendentious. For a start, it is simply not true that the term 'nationality', at least in English, is a sociological as well as a legal (rather than political, as stated) construct - let alone that it is not a clear notion, a ridiculous comment to make. As recorded in the OED [15], nationality is inherently a legal term, and a well-defined one indeed (see entries 3a and 3b) - it applies insofar a nation-state confers certain rights to certain people. It seems to me that you are conflating 'nationality' with 'national identity', two terms that are not interchangeable - the latter, as is the case with many other group identities, is indeed a sociological concept, and in a way that nationality clearly isn't. Note, further, that describing Hasel's nationality as Catalan, or Nicola Sturgeon's as Scottish, an example used above, would warrant stating that Hasel is a Catalan national and Sturgeon a Scottish national, and in English this is quite infelicitous, as there are no Catalan or Scottish nation-states to confer any such status to them. Another matter completely is whether Hasel identifies as (exclusively) Catalan or Sturgeon as (mostly) Scottish. I personally think that it's perfectly fine to refer to Hasel as Catalan rather than Spanish in the main text and to include some information about his identity and beliefs (though these are not clear-cut), but adding the formula Nationality=Catalan to the infobox signals the wrong interpretation for an English-speaking person - as stated, the word triggers a legal concept, not a sociological one. I also think it's a little tendentious to use the Citizenship=Spanish formula instead, as it is rather arbitrary here and could be construed as an attempt to please Catalan nationalists (no need to refer to any IPs, an unwarranted slight, in my opinion). The following article from The Economist on the relationship between nationality and citizenship is useful, and I would note that Hasel is technically both a Spanish national and a Spanish citizen [16].

But anyway, how about not including anything at all in the infobox, in fact? I have noticed that there is no such information on Sturgeon's infobox, and though one may be somewhat assured that readers will understand that a Scottish person is by default a British national (and citizen), I would like to think that most readers will reach a similar conclusion in the case of a Catalan person.

Oh, and by the way, the reference to 'nacionalidades históricas' from the Spanish Constitution is really beside the point here, mostly because the word 'nationality' is obviously not an appropriate translation of this complex noun phrase (and, in any case, the phrase itself appears to be closer to the concept of 'national identities' than to anything else, as explained here: [17]).

There is also the mess regarding Hasel's real first name, which is clearly Pablo and not Pau (for some reason, some Catalan newspapers insist on translating it into Catalan), but I leave that for another day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.75.9.30 (talk) 12:38, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

"What's your criteria to state the opposite?" – the simple fact that as you said your definiton is "under the eyes of international law". There exist other definitions of nationality that are not those of international law.

The link 194.75.9.30 provided is behind a paywall. But the open-access version of the OED gives two definitions for "nationality" [18] : 1) The status of belonging to a particular nation, and 2) An ethnic group forming a part of one or more political nations.

Both of these definitions apply to Hasél. The Catalans are an ethnic group in Spain (definition 2), and Catalonia is defined as a nation in its State of autonomy [19] (definition 1). Finally, this same statute of autonomy, a legally binding document in Spain, also defines Catalonia as a "nationality" (and not simply a "historic nationality").

Girrit (talk) 14:34, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

You are getting a bit mixed-up here. First of all, the question "what's your criteria to state the opposite" comes from a different contribution, not from the one you are commenting on. Secondly, you misunderstand the point of referencing the OED (which should be accessible via your local library) and also misapply the definition from the source you quote. No-one denies that the word 'nationality' can refer to an ethnic group (not quite a sociological construct either, to labour the point once again); the point, rather, is that its most common meaning in English is the legal connotation - that is, as a status that a nation-state confers to a citizen, and that's why this connotation is the first entry of your own source, in fact, in line with how dictionaries are organised. The point, to be more precise, is that an English-speaking reader would understand the Nationality information on the infobox as a legal concept; it would be nonsense to claim that a reader would think of an ethnic group in parsing Nationality=Catalan/Scottish. Indeed, a bona fide reader couldn't be faulted from believing that Hasel is a Catalan national (or Sturgeon a Scottish national) and that there's a nation-state conferring such status upon encountering such information on the infobox, contrary to the actual facts, and this would clearly defeat the whole purpose of Wikipedia. As a matter of fact, the Wikipedia manual on how to deal with citizenship/nationality matters clearly focuses on the legal interpretations of both concepts and the conflict there might be between citizenship and nationality in some cases doesn't seem to apply here at all ([20]).

Regarding the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia (not the State, as you first have it), you clearly misrepresent the actual facts. Putting to one side the point that my comment clearly stated that it is a nation-STATE that confers the status of nationality as well as the corrolary that the English word 'nationality', in its most common connotation, is not an appropriate translation of the Spanish 'nacionalidad' when the latter is employed to refer to 'national identity' rather than to any sort of legal status (let alone an ethnic group), it is quite simply false to state that the Catalan Statute specifies any 'legally binding' to the terms nation or nationality as applied to Catalonia. And by the way, what is this supposed to mean, in any case? How is it legally binding, and what rights does it confer upon Catalans other than the ones they already had before the Statute was passed? But the claim is clearly mistaken. As Spain's Constitutional Court ruled in 2010, the term "nation" in the Statute's preamble has no legal standing whatsoever (as clearly explained here: [21]).

Anyway, I stand by my suggestion that perhaps there's no need to have any such information in the infobox; as is the case in the Nicola Sturgeon entry, an informed reader might know that Catalonia is a region in Spain and that a number of Catalans profess a sui generis national identity, even though they are Spanish nationals and citizens. Would that be an acceptable consensus? What's certainly mistaken, and wildly misleading, is to add Nationality=Catalan to the infobox.

There's still of course the matter of Hasel's name. His real name, as it appears in any court documents you might want to consult (this one seems to be from a Catalan court, no less: [22]) is Pablo Rivadulla, not Pau, regardless of the practice of some Catalans newspapers to translate his first name into Catalan (a rather recent event, incidentally, as I can attest after following his case for years, for personal reasons). I could also nitpick on the fact that describing his full name as Catalan, as is currently the case, is also a bit misleading, not least because Rivadulla is not a Catalan name (but Galician). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:E286:1300:E8C4:3437:841B:756C (talk) 16:33, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

I think the previous user has given very clear arguments on the "Nationality / Citizenship" dispute. On my side, I think if including Hasel´s Spanish nationality in the infobox is causing distress, we could just omit this information, in the same way as in the Sturgeon article. Otherwise, If the rest of the users consider this information relevant, I would keep it. Laocon (talk) 20:26, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, the current page leaves the line out of the infobox, let's just leave it that way. Girrit (talk) 12:16, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Lead

@PailSimon: Could you better explain your changes per WP:LEAD? Hasél has been convicted of assault in at least three occasions, the text that you removed accurately represents the article's content. --NoonIcarus (talk) 12:15, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Its interesting how you found this article but I digress - The lead is supposed to "a summary of its most important contents". His assault convictions are relatively trivial details.PailSimon (talk) 12:29, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand what do you mean by how I found this article, you joined and started editing in it mere hours after I first did. I also don't understand how can these convictions can be unimportant and "trivial", contrary to the freedom of speech issues included so far in the lead. --NoonIcarus (talk) 14:15, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

I must join the opinion of PailSimon. The lead is only a summary of the most important contents; further information is provided in the body of the article. The lead is not there to list every single song, book, event and court case he has been involved in; such things are detailed in the subsequent sections. Following this reasoning, the lead seems correct as it currently is: it successively 1) introduces Hasél as a person, 2) states what his work is about and its perception, and 3) introduces the reader to the current ongoing controversy.

Building on this, the current description of his work as "in support of far-left politics" is a correct and concise summary, that includes the broad range of his subject-matter (from support for GRAPO to republicanism, through openness to immigration and Catalan nationalism) ; the details of what that exactly entails are developed the the article.

Girrit (talk) 22:19, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Maybe, on the top would be added a text linked to the body of the article, to summarise and make a reference, as neutral as possible, to his legal issues. Maybe something like: "Pablo Hasel has been in trouble with the Spanish courts". Laocon (talk) 11:40, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, my main concern is that the lead doesn't accurately summarize his legal issues, leaving the impression that they are only related to speech, while at the same time it shouldn't go too much into detail. I'll add a tag to reflect this. --NoonIcarus (talk) 12:11, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

He's only notable for his most recent legal issues not his previous assault legal issues so there is no need to mention it.PailSimon (talk) 10:12, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

I think NoonIcarus has a valid point here, the second sentence, by starting with "His songs [...]" implies that this is the only source of his legal troubles. I propose changing it to "His songs and actions [...]"'; the body of the article can then explain in further detail what exactly those songs and actions are (give examples of lyrics, detail the cases of assault, etc.). Girrit (talk) 10:32, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

The point here is that he is convicted now mainly for assault, not because of insulting the monarchy. In fact he was firstly condemned for praising terrorism, after the sentence was suspended, and then he was reincident, commited assault, violent acts and so on, insulting the monarchy and the institutions was just the last straw after being repeatedly reincident. Some people that hates Spain, just try to denigrate the country by just using the argument of being imprisoned for just insulting the monarchy, and some of you are biased trying to reflect he is being convicted because of "his speech" and because Spain is opressive, which is something completely biased and not correlated to actual facts. Please let's be serious and neutral here, at least here, there is enough manipulation on the media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2E02:2B:1F00:D9E5:9FA4:A87B:F64B (talk) 19:41, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

That is simply not true: Hasel's issues coverage dates back to at least 2011. If there wasn't notability about said issues they wouldn't be included in the article either. Girrit's proposal sounds like a good improvement. --NoonIcarus (talk) 23:39, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Change enacted. I also moved the bit about claims it is an attack of free speech to the third sentence, because while it does apply to his songs doesn't apply to his actions, so it seemed more appropriate in its new place. Girrit (talk) 14:07, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Name

I found an official source confirming that his first name is officially "Pablo". I therefore changed the lead to show only "Pablo", and added a new section to explain his different names. Girrit (talk) 12:34, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Good stuff, thanks for the edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.75.9.30 (talk) 18:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

The 2015 "Citizen Security Law" and the plans for a legal reform

Pablo Hasèl was convicted for his texts and tweets, based on the "Citizen Security Law" introduced in 2015.

• es:Ley Orgánica de protección de la seguridad ciudadana (2015)/ ″Ley Mordaza″ (Gag Law)

• Censorship in Spain#Law on Citizen Security of 2015

• When the Citizen Safety Law went into effect in July 2015, the opposition accused the government of creating “a police state” because it gave law-enforcement officers [ Mossos d'Esquadra ] the power to hand out administrative sanctions that were, until then, the sole preserve of judges. → El Pais

• After rapper Pablo Hasél gets jail for tweets, Spain plans to end prison terms for crimes involving freedom of speech. → El Pais

• For nine nights, this seaside city’s streets, long quiet from pandemic curfews, have erupted in sometimes violent demonstrations that have spread to Madrid and other Spanish hubs. ... Now 40 percent of Spain’s youth are unemployed ... Amid public pressure that was growing even before the protests, the Justice Ministry said on Monday [Feb. 27, 2021] that it planned to change the country’s criminal code to reduce sentences related to the kinds of speech violations for which Mr. Hasél was sentenced. → NYT --217.234.77.27 (talk) 17:47, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

No he wasn't. Law on Citizen Security of 2015 was passed 4/2015. Both sentences clearly state (https://www.poderjudicial.es/search/AN/openDocument/243dfd8918cfedf7/20140409, page 11 and https://www.poderjudicial.es/search/AN/openDocument/440c1f8f2fb68fd6/20150313, page 7) he broke the anti-terrorism law 7/2000 (which was passed in 2000). He was convicted of incitement to terrorism. MateoSag (talk) 17:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

You don't seem to be a legal expert. But, even if: Wikipedia:No original research → "Do not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so."

Reliable secondary sources:

• Pablo Hasel en el país de las Leyes Mordaza

• The Independent: ″Hasél was charged under 2015 amendments [Strafrechtsverschärfungen] to the Public Security Law known as the “Gag Law” at the time, legislation by the then-government of the Popular party that has been criticised by rights groups for limiting free speech.″

• Deutsche Welle: ″Hasél, por su parte, debe pasar dos años entre rejas por ″enaltecimiento del terrorismo". La sentencia se basa en una ley antiterrorista, aprobada en 2015 bajo el Gobierno conservador de Mariano Rajoy, a pesar de la crítica internacional. Se trata de la conocida popularmente como "ley mordaza", recuerda a DW Carlos Collado Seidel, antiguo secretario general de PEN en Alemania. ″La pena contra Hasél es claramente desproporcionada", continúa, "sobre todo cuando el terrorismo de ETA, que es al que podría aplicarse, no existe ya desde hace años". También el reconocido experto Walther L. Bernecker, profesor en la universidad de Erlangen-Núremberg, considera exagerada la reacción de la Justicia española. "¿Qué es un insulto a la corona en un Estado democrático parlamentario?", inquiere el experto. "Si Hasél llama 'banda de mafiosos' a los miembros de la familia real después de que la prensa informe a diario de los casos de corrupción de la Casa Real, ¿dónde se puede establecer el límite?". Bernecker describe como "tenso" el debate sobre la monaquía en España y agrega que todavía está por verse si algún día el rey Juan Carlos deberá defenderse ante la Justicia de las acusaciones que lo acechan.″

Juan Carlos confirmed Hasél last year, when he fled Spain like a thief to avoid prosecution on corruption charges. There is a widespread disgust with the corruption and nepotism of the monarchy. --87.170.198.200 (talk) 09:35, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Ignorant journalists leftist journalists are not the word of god. If their mistakes are contradicted by the sentence itself and every single reliable source in Spain - than clearly they are not a reliable source. Historian734 (talk) 13:17, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm no legal expert. Fortunately there are specialized legal Publications (just some of them):

• The „Pablo Hasél Case“
• Pablo Hasél: su historial judicial (es)

In the specialized legal sources (reliable secondary sources) you will find the list of laws he was charged with, the links to the laws and the links to the court rulings. The specialized secondary sources match with the primary sources. None of mentioned laws are the law of Law on Citizen Security. All the laws are previous to the Law on Citizen Security (2015). I think your sources are a clear example of Tabloid journalism. MateoSag (talk) 17:09, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Spanish not Catalan in lead

Please see Wikipedia MOS and other Catalan figures who are all referred to as Spanish on Wikipedia. Artur Mas, Pep Guardiola, Pau Gasol, Gerard Pique and a long etc. No need to discuss this further but will take it to noticeboard and/or arbitration if required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historian734 (talk • contribs) 18:27, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Just to be clear. This battle has been fought and lost dozens of times on Wikipedia so I suggest you guys desist from trying again.--Historian734 (talk) 18:47, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

The presentation of his nationality in the article is a consensus obtained after a lengthy discussion, available above. You may read there that using "Catalan" in the introduction is well attested on Wikipedia in many notable articles (for example Carles Puigdemont, Quim Torra and Antoni Gaudí).

That said, I must say your above comments do seem quite worrying and against core Wikipedia values. This article, as well as all others, strives to present the situation as it is. It is not a "battle", and I recommend avoiding using thinly veiled threats in your discussions.

Regards, Girrit (talk) 11:43, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

On my side, I'd try to avoid any National identitary debate on the article, as long as it is not strictly relevant to its contents. I'd prefer to include Hasel's current nationality, as I commented on the past talk above and since it is what is suggested by the Manual of Style, but if it causes distress to our Catalan nationalist companions, I'd avoid including any nationality at all, as a context. In this case, I'd go for a solution such as: "Pablo Hasel is a rapper (...) born in Lleida". Laocon (talk) 09:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

But "that debate" is strictly relevant to unterstand the rapper, the laws, the injustice and the protests - the whole situation in the country. Is the distress caused by "our" Catalan nationalist or by "our" Spanish Uninists? There is a right of self-determination of the peripheral nationalities of Spain. And you being on a "delete / erase / man on a mission" mode does not help: like here or here! Simply to deny that there is a conflict will not make it go away. Conflicts is are a routine part of human existence - whether at the level of states, organizations, or the family. Spain has to improve legal protection of free speech (Spain signed the Declaration of Human Rights at the United Nations, and on 24 November 1977 signed the European Convention on Human Rights, nice foto, Spain has obligations!), even Pedro Sanchez said he will improve legal protection of free speech... while jailing the rapper. --217.234.76.8 (talk) 17:35, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Who marks the relevance of the aforementioned debate? An unknown IP address that commits a clear act of WP:WIKIHOUNDING? Instead of putting names on other editors, I invite you to create an account and argument without disrupting.

Having said that, I think you are confusing two terms: A) a debate on free speech with B) a debate on Catalan nationalism. Those two ones above are different topics and are neither directly nor indirectly connected to the Pablo Hasel's bio article. As it was clearly stated before, Hasel is not imprisoned by the sake of being Catalan, Spaniard, Lleidatan, Catalan Independentist, Spanish Confederalist, or whatever label you want to use. Otherwise, I am afraid that we would not be neither presenting any neutral POV in this article nor contributing to its proper evolution based on facts and not on personal opinions.

I personally think that your POV is interesting, but irrelevant to this context. For this reason, I would invite you to create an article where you would extend and defend your ideas, provided they adhere to the WP:POLICY. Laocon (talk) 11:50, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

I do not want to bite a newbie like you, Laocon... WP:BITE ;-) But WP:HUMAN: "They should register for an account (e.g. if they want to participate): No. You need to accept their contributions, heed their suggestions and participate in consensus building with them. There is no requirement for anyone to register for an account before they can participate in the building of this encyclopedia. There is always the requirement that you behave." --87.170.194.222 (talk) 17:42, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't care whether there is a WP:HUMAN, a WP:MEOW or a WP:BOT behind an IP address. What I do care is about what users contribute and share in order to reach any consensus. We could continue this WP:TALKOFFTOPIC ad infinitum, so please, let's focus in the topic, would you? Laocon (talk) 09:41, 24 March 2021 (UTC)