Talk:Community of Madrid

Madrid outside the city

yes it's the same than the New York State and the New York City, the region:comunidad autonoma has the same name than its capital city.--Madalino 19:14, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Peer review requested of Madrid article

A Peer review has been requested for Madrid, the article about the capital city of Spain. Please feel free to edit the Madrid article to improve it and/or leave a comment at Wikipedia:Peer_review#Madrid. EspanaViva 19:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Rename

Wouldn't it be better to rename this article be renamed to Community of Madrid, since that is the official name and avoid the unnecessary parentheses? --the Dúnadan 21:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Is there a reason why the article cannot be moved by registered users? --the Dúnadan 21:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

It is important to notices that the castillian word "Comunidad" has a double sense: as "community" which is frecuently translated but also as "commonwealth" in the sense of goverment structure. In the case of the Autonomuos Community of Madrid it is rather important because the goverment structure that joins the Assembly and the Goverment of Madrid is also known as Comunidad in the sense of Commonwealth (more or less like the Generalitat of Catalonia).

In my opinion we must distinguish between the Autonomous Community of Madrid and the Commonwealth of Madrid (the organisms that rules the AC of Madrid). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.244.124.187 (talk) 15:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree, the official name is not Community of Madrid but Comunidad Autonoma de Madrid thus Madrid Autonomous Community. Moreover in the traffic signals that are located on the Madrid AC borders only say "Madrid" because thats the real name of the region (as the Comunidad Autonoma de Castilla-La Mancha is referred only as Castile-La Mancha or the Comunidad Autonoma de Catalunya is referred only as Catalonia).

Madrilians call the Madrid AC as Comunidad de Madrid cause it is the name of the government (as I think is the intention of the above post who claims that Commonwealth of Madrid should be the correct translation, but thats is for another disccussion, maybe).

That the name of Community of Madrid is not official for the territory there is in the article evidences as the parlamentary brach of the "Commonwealth" of Madrid is called simply "Assembly of Madrid" and the head of the Commonwealth is now, after Ruiz Gallardon reformation, called simply "the President of Madrid" (despite people are still calling Presidente de la Comunidad---> President of the Commonwealth).

I consider that the administrators should move the article to Madrid Autonomous Community or Autonomous Community of Madrid and redirect Madrid to a dissambiguation page for chosing between the Town and the AC. --Dzamandzar (talk) 12:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

State, Kingdom, Nation or what

I really don't care—for Wikipedia purposes—about political ideologies, preferences, right, left, conservative, liberal or whatsoever nationalistic inclination or lack thereof. That is why I have no problems editing an article of the Community of Madrid or Catalonia. However, I do oppose zealous edits of either nationalists—whether "regional"-nationalist or "national"-nationalists—that undermine the diversity of the project. One such edit is that of "national"-nationalists who oppose the term "Spanish State" in all articles related to Spain, in that they perceive that the term opens the way "regional" nationalists' propaganda. This, is IMHO, ludicrous. For several reasons:

• The term is correct in English both in grammar and its use in political science, regardless of its status as an official term or not. We speak of the "State" referring to the government of the United Kingdom; we speak of the Mexican State; the Argentine State, the German State, when referring to the national government. In that way, even if it wasn't official, "Spanish State" conveys simply the meaning of the words themselves: an independent State, which is the Spanish State.
• The term "Spanish State" (Estado Español) is extensively—almost exclusively—used in the current Spanish constitution. The alternative "Spanish nation" appears only occasionally, even though it is equally valid. However, the term "Kingdom of Spain" does not appear at all. Not even once. I do not oppose using the term "Kingdom of Spain"—it is equally valid, based on other laws—but to claim that "Spanish State" is no longer official [sic] and that it must be replaced with "Kingdom of Spain" in all instances is ludicrous, and simply portrays the dislike of a term because of the purported "regional"-nationalistic connotations it has, in that "regional"-nationalists tend to use it a lot.

Diversity of opinions—especially when using neutral, valid, current and constitutional terms—is good for Wikipedia. Let's contribute to making it better, not biased towards a particular political preference. --the Dúnadan 00:04, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe you're reasonable enough to quit pushing your POV in keeping using "Spanish State" (both words together). I'm not going to start losing my time bringing references for days and days and days. You just have to read the Spanish State article to assume that this denomination of the country has francoist (in the past) and federalist and nationalist (nowadays) political connotations.

So, I admit that I start doubting your good faith when you keep using that denomination, even when knowing perfectly its controversy.

Want to call it "seat of government of the State"? fine... "seat of government of the Country"? fine... "seat of government of the Nation"? fine... But I refuse to accept "seat of government of the Spanish State" It is not fully NPOV (and you know it very well)

You claim that Spanish State is correct. Is Spain a Nation? Yes... Is it correct to describe it as a Nation? Yes... Then why do you keep reverting the fact of calling Spain a nation? Why do you keep adding "Spanish State" even if knowing it's political connotations (NOT NPOV)?

Why... Why... Why...

I kindly ask you to quit using "Spanish State" as a denomination to Spain (outside the 1939-78 period). You may choose among 3 other.

Let's see your good faith... --MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 00:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry Maurice, but you seem to be unmoving and uncompromising in your position and reject a constitutional term based on your personal perception of purported "Francoist" or nationalistic connotation. I urge you, once again, to think things over. Spanish State is a valid constitutional term. You can bring hundreds of references of anti-nationalists, but the constitution is a primary source. Please, Maurice, for the second time, compromise. --the Dúnadan 00:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Politics apart, I had no idea you had a Sandbox that you were using to translate. We can use it, if you want, but if you noticed, I did not translate verbatim but shortened as I was translating, eliminating irrelevant or unnecessary stuff. As such, I don't think it is necessary. In editing the original article we have the advantage of having a history of discrepancies and compromises, and other users who do not know me or you or your sandbox can participate in the process and decision making. --the Dúnadan 00:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Despite the good faith that I have shown and willingness to contribute in any article, whether Madrid or Catalonia, you seem to be uncompromising and closed to any other options. Three things to notice, though:

• This is the English encyclopedia; whatever purported connotation the term carries in Spanish, it does not carry it in English. Just as "country" in English, as you have aptly pointed out, might carry a different connotation than "país", the term, in English does not evoke any purported Francoist ideas.
• It is your perception that the term evokes Francoist ideas. That is called POV. The term is constitutional, that is NPOV. You, based on your personal preferences, want to restrict its use to the Franco era. The constitution of Spain thinks otherwise. It is extensive used in the present—but from political parties you personally dislike, and therefore, want to avoid it.
• You must understand that your political preference is not right. There is nothing wrong with being a Spanish-nationalist (or Unionist) anymore than being a Catalan-nationalist or a Basque-nationalist. That is called NPOV. Even, if the term is used by nationalists only—which is not the case—that doesn't make it wrong. It might go against your political preferences, but that doesn't make it wrong. You must understand that this Wikipedia is neutral, and it is written in the English language.

I showed my good intentions in willing to collaborate in all articles in a neutral way. You've shown your intentions to promote your own particular POV. Please, reconsider. Let's work to make this a truly neutral and high-quality article, which involves compromise. Again, I kindly ask you to think things over. Read the article over again. Adding the constitutional term "Spanish State" in the English language does not evoke any connotation. Even the "Politics and government" section is well-written and balanced. That should show you that unlike you, who only wanted to edit Catalonia to protect your POV, but never bothered to expand the History, Geography or any other section, I am contributing to expand all sections. Please, in the best of Spirits, reconsider your position, even if it is only to avoid a fourth reversion from your part.

Cheers, --the Dúnadan 22:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Again State

As defined by dictionaries, and as understood by all English speakers, State is also a nation or a country. Plus: [1]. The world "country" is only once, the word "State" and the feared "Spanish State" is shown dozens of times. Why the insistence? First you opposed "Spanish State", but you said you were fine with "State", but of course, you do not understand the word compromise. So, after a while, after I compromised, now you disregard and show no respect for your own words, and recant. Please Maurice, show your spirit of cooperation, for once. --the Dúnadan 22:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Well the anon user made me open my eyes. I like "Country" more. Is that ok with you? Or do we have to do what you order?. Is "Country" wrong? No Is "Country" a badly used description in this context? NO. Does the word "country" follow wikipedia guidelines? YES. Is the word "state" too ambiguous? Yes. Is the word "Country" ambiguous? NO. Then I'll rather use it. Cheers. --MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 23:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, read your own constitution. "The capital of the State is Madrid" (in an English translation). I don't think State is ambiguous. But this, of course, is my perception, as well as yours. Thank God there are dictionaries. And according to them, there is no ambiguity. --the Dúnadan 23:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Flag

That is not the flag of Madrid. That is the independet and illegal flag of Catalonia (with the red star). So, ¿protected? :S --85.152.176.233 (talk) 00:14, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Fueros of Alcalá de Henares and its Tierra

In Christian Repopulation section says: In the 13th century, Madrid was the only city of the region that preserved its own juridical personality, at first with the Old Fuero (Charter) and later with the Royal Fuero, granted by Alfonso X of Castile in 1262 and ratified by Alfonso XI in 1339 It's false. Tierra de Alcalá (Land of Alcalá, Alcalá shire) had two Fueros (regional code of laws, charter). The Old Fuero (1135, even older than Madrid) and the New Fuero in 1509. There was also a review of the Old Fuero in 1223. The New Fuero had legal validity until the fall of Antiguo Regimen (Former Regime) in Spain. In Spanish version: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comunidad_de_Madrid#La_repoblaci.C3.B3n_cristiana Can you help me editing this, please? I have bad English. Alcalá (talk) 14:11, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

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) 14:30, 11 August 2017 (UTC)