Talk:Spain/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Showing the name in the regional languages

As the spanish constitution states, these languages are only acknowledged as coofficial in their respective autonomous comunities, furthermore, neither asturian nor aragonese have the status of cooficial languages in Asturias or Aragon respectivly. I would also sugest that if it's decided to keep the name in the cooficial languages, it is also shown in valencian, or atleast changing the label from "catalan" to "catalan/valencian". 185.224.49.224 (talk) 22:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

The name is translated into languages that are native to the place, not necessarily official. As for the change you suggest, treating Valencian and Catalan separately makes absolutely no sense (just as I and many other people have already told you many times in several other places). The choice of the name "Catalan/Valencia" over "Catalan" is in this case not up for discussion, for this name is automatically generated when you use the template for IPA: Catalan pronunciation: [IPA]. And the name this template automatically generates is "Catalan". So if you want this to be changed, the ones you should contact are (I guess) the administrators. That would change the wording for every page in which this template is inserted. Agpshi (talk) 14:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Your edit was made disrupting the consensus and deleting something that has been here for years.

I have accepted your point of view in the page languages of Spain (albeit you were the only one which didn't agree with me and you changed it MONTHS LATER) but now I did the same here and only 2 weeks later.

Also notice someone else deleted your edits and completely wiped out Valencian, which didn't even allow Catalan/Valencian to be together, and as you might know, that's an entire disrespect movement for the Valencian people but also for the entire Valencian Community culture, history and traditions.

The Spanish Constitution and the Valencian Statute of Autonomy officially call it Valencian. We both know this and neither of us have a problem with this. From a linguistical point of view, they are 2 names for the same language (both Catalan and Valencian are valid, as you know as well and as the sources refer) but someone after you made a further edit deleting all of that thus making it even unmatchable with the sources, as the sources mention Valencian.

I am not the user from above (he is using an IP, I don't use IPs... if I want to edit, I use my account) you did first an edit on 7th of July in this page deleting all of the stuff mentioned above without consensus. Okay, now it's time to reach that consensus if you want to make these changes. Until then, you have to leave the page as it was before, as the discussion we had in the page Languages of Spain as you surely remember. Then, even you with your own account changed it to Valencian/Catalan or Catalan/Valencian but a day later another user completely wiped out Valencian. And that's not acceptable. LucenseLugo (talk) 22:35, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

You don't even have to care about what I've wrote above as that info from the infobox was added by a permanently banned/blocked user:

MylowattsIAm (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

The info regarding the official regional languages is already mentioned on the FIRST note of this page. If you still want to change Valencian somehow (remember it was here for years, check the edit history) please explain your point and reach a consensus with more people than just you and me. As I prefer to leave it as it was, since the official Valencian Statute of Autonomy calls it Valencian and in the languages box I've clearly stated (as it was before) that Catalan/Valencian are the name for the same language, just officially called Catalan in Catalonia and the Balearic Islands and Valencian in the Valencian Community. LucenseLugo (talk) 22:48, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, sure, you are not that user. I am just going to say a couple of things:

When you say that my edit "was made disrupting the consensus and deleting something that has been here for years", and when you ask me to "remember it was here for years, check the edit history", perhaps I should remind you that the first and only edit that treated them as separate languages was made on March 8th 2024. Before that, only the four co-official languages were shown (Occitan, Catalan, Basque and Galician) and that is the version that has been on the page for ages. You also said "linguists use" or "the Spanish consitution says", to which I can only answer that perhaps you should take a look at the constitution (which never mentions any language other than Spanish) and to the linguistic bibliography (which you are clearly unfamiliar with and which, for the most part, uses only the name "Catalan" and definitely always avoids writing in a way that makes them look like different languages).

Consensus is to be sought in order to properly reflect different scientific approaches to the same phenomenon. If you say the Earth is flat and I say it is round, Wikipedia will not try to reach a middle term between us: it will reflect my view and, perhaps, mention yours as a pseudoscientific doctrine with some social relevance. The case of Catalan/Valencian is not different. You just cannot list them separately just as you cannot list Spanish and Castillian, or Romanian and Moldovan, or Flemish and Dutch, separately. Agpshi (talk) 10:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

First of all, keep doing again these reverts trying to push your OWN POV (as you were the only one who did these changes in 7th July 2024 without any consensus) and you will be reported.

And second, I won't read all of that BS honestly. I have seen now you accuse me of being a sockpuppet of several accounts which I didn't even know. I understand you are clinically obsessed with me because I am strongly against your extremely biased agenda. Since you've made it personal, wait for consensus from other people. Ciao ciao. LucenseLugo (talk) 14:20, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

What I won't tolerate, though, is yourself spitting out on such an important page on Wikipedia and making silly edits and repeating the same info twice as well as evading the official name of the language spoken in a specifical region just because you're biased and you can't accept it, the sources are there to back it up. Try to be 1% neutral and read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not.

@Agpishi:, that change you have just made (reverting all my edits just in a "instant rage" for that personal bias you have against me) was adding back a change made by a user who is PERMANENTLY BLOCKED: Revision as of 07:08, 21 May 2024

MylowattsIAm (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

So if your desire is to keep what blocked trolls/sockpuppets is, redo again my edits. If that's not your desire, then EXPLAIN YOURSELF, explain why do you want to change that, why do you want to repeat something twice and wait for consensus. Adéu! LucenseLugo (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Pinging correct username, @Agpshi:. I agree that the current version is the stable one, and the changes that were reverted should not be reinstated without consensus to do so on this page. William Avery (talk) 16:10, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree. The other one was breaking the stable version and it was also instroduced by a now permanently blocked user.

@Agpshi: Please engage in this talk section and explain your point before doing further edits. As you can see, I'm not the only user who has noticed that your edit was breaking the stable version. I did not accuse you, though, because that was added by another user. But don't revert stable edits without consensus. LucenseLugo (talk) 23:10, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Spain is not a cultural superpower.

This Wikipedia article says that Spain is a cultural superpower. But the citations given in the article (citations 14 and 15) only claim that Spain was a global superpower in the Age of Discovery (15th thru 17th centuries) like Britain, Portugal and France, and a world heritage power. Being a global superpower (like the U.S. is now) and a world heritage power are not the same thing as being a cultural superpower. The people of the Iberian penisnsula and peoples in Europe all the way up to Britain were granted Roman citizenship by the Latins during the Roman Empire which started BCE. This Wikipedia article also says Spain has a cultural wealth, but it attributes it to Rome (its Latin language and culture), the Visigoth settlers (who spoke Latin), and the Muslims who conquored the Visigoths and started speaking Latin. Spain, having used Italy's Latin language and culture, does not qualify it or any other European country, except Italy, as being the cultural superpower it is.

I've just checked out the Culture section of Wikipedia's Italy article. Italy is a cultural superpower. The valid citation 333 on the Italy article lists The Washington Post, The Australian, the former Foreign Affairs Minister Giulio Terzi, and U.S. President Barack Obama attesting to the fact that Italy is a cultural superpower. Italy gave the world the Latin alphabet which was derived from the Etruscans and Greek alphabet which was parented by the Phonecian alphabet and ultimately Egyptian hieroglyphs. Italy also gave the world the Gregorian calendar (a revision of Caesar's Julian calendar), and a court system (a judge, selected jury and protracted trials) which improved upon the Greek's laymen system which, itself, was an improvement on the Middle East's system.

It's safe to say that Italy was the last of the cultural superpowers. Its capital, Rome, gave us Latin which derived not only into Italian, but many other European languages including English. Italy's Latin alphabet and calendar are used worldwide. The Greeks gave us Western Culture and the Greek alphabet. The Middle East gave us the Phonecian culture and alphabet. And, of course, the Egyptians gave us their culture and hieroglyphs. All cultural superpowers. Countries that use the Latin culture of Italy, whether it be the U.S., Spain or the UK, are not cultural superpowers. Superpowers during epochs, yes. Cultural superpowers, as Italy is, no. This article needs to be cleaned up. Its first section is unnecessarily misleading and fluffy. Claudio di Roma (talk) 11:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

As I already told you, these are not exclusive things. Being a cultural supwerpower is not a status owned by Italy or countries home to ancient civilisations. Countries have continued to produce culture up to this day. The US is unquestionably a cultural superpower, due to the impact that country has on modern science, cinema, pop music etc. That may not be the classical culture of Italy, Greece and Egypt, but it is still a very influential culture, just of a different type. If the problem is the need of proper sources to back up the claim for Spain I would stick with that, without going into other reasonings, cause you are making very extreme claims: Spain certainly has cultural wealth as it has a big body of Spanish art, Spanish literature etc.; English uses the Latin script, but it's not a Latin language. Having been influenced by Latin culture does not disqualify Spain, Portugal, the UK or whatever from being a cultural superpower on their own. The article does have questionable things that have been introduced over time by agenda-driven socks and we can deal with that, but that's another issue. Regarding the lack of a source directly calling Spain a cultural superpower I have added a "further citation needed" for Spain at the section where the "cultural superpower" references links to, but I am against removing the passage as i don't think it will be problematic for users to find such a source. Barjimoa (talk) 14:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Do we have a source for this statement? Moxy🍁 15:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Okay, that's fair. I will watch out for the editor you mentioned from Spain who makes grandiose edits here. I agree, he's the one making the absurd claims. But, remember, cinema comes from Europe not North America. And Pop music (popular music) comes from many nations. I think the black people whose ancestors were brought to the American continent are among the most productive people on that continent. Specifically in the USA. They gave us Gospel, Blues, Jazz, Swing, Boogie Woogie, Rock and Roll, Disco, Hip Hop.

Whenever I think of the US, I'm reminded of black people. Probably from seeing "Gone with the Wind". Black people's music is always enjoyable. The buzz over here is Kamala will win. It would be a wonderful thing if a black lady landed the job as the first US female president. And, of couse, the Native Americans are making their way up to the US border. They're arriving in caravans and the whole world is watching. J.Lo is very Native American-looking. It would be nice to see a Native American woman (or man) in the White House soon. Claudio di Roma (talk) 16:48, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

The cited sources don't say it's a superpower and, in the absence of reliable sources calling it such (and probably even if there are any) it's WP:PUFFERY that we don't need to echo. Further, I looked through the subsequent sections to see if there was any information to substantiate the claim. Nearly all the periods, styles, movements covered are from the past, some of them centuries ago, and the majority of the people named are dead. About the only thing current is the movie industry, so maybe it's a cinematic superpower. And tapas. Tapas everywhere. But art? Music? Literature? Poetry? Architecture? Television? Possibly in the Spanish-speaking world. But, as I said, going by the article, it's mostly in the past. So Spain was long a cultural powerhouse. Still, I'm approaching this from a WP:OR point of view. Sources are key. Largoplazo (talk) 19:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Looks like it's been here for some time (although its been contentious and reverted multiple times) .... Let's see if anyone can come up with a source. If not it should be removed as a weird Wikipedia construct. I see on the main page about cultural superpower there has also contentious edits that have been discussed on the talk page to no avail. Moxy🍁 21:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, Moxy, I take back what I said. After checking the history of this, I have found that Spain as a cultural superpower was indeed added (here and in the page Power (international relations)) by socks of User:JamesOredan. In talk:Power (international relations) he used his sock Venezia Friulano and another suspected sock TechnicianGB to push back against users who objected to its introduction. This time I had not realized it was him, sorry. Barjimoa (talk) 06:42, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@Largoplazo "About the only thing current is the movie industry, so maybe it's a cinematic superpower. And tapas. Tapas everywhere. But art? Music? Literature? Poetry? Architecture? Television?"

Spain currently is the second-most visited country in the world, with 600 Millions of people speaking its language, including a huge number of foreign students.

Search better sources or delete the statement, but have some respect for the country.

@Claudio di Roma

"Spain, having used Italy's Latin language and culture, does not qualify it or any other European country, except Italy, as being the cultural superpower it is."

Honestly, this discredits you as someone educated in history. I don't know why Spain attracts so much attention, contempt and criticism from other nationalities. In recent months it seems to be the norm in this article. OceanStones (talk) 14:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Spain attracks tourists because it's a major sellout. It's extremely inexpensive and sells land to other EU members and the British. Especially the British. The British have holiday homes and permanent homes in Spain because they purchased property there. Now, the Spaniards are complaining there are too many foreigners in their country. Well, the British and the other EU members got what they paid for; their land and homes in Spain. They bought it, they own it. Claudio di Roma (talk) 14:41, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

The price factor does not make sense, Spain has relatively similar prices to Italy and Greece. UK citizens with property (House) in Spain does not exceed 13,000, however, each year Spain receives ~14 Million Britons, and 300,000 live in Spain regularly, so your argument that there is a lot of tourism in Spain because "the country sells its land" seems quite weak.

As @Barjimoa told you, it is not necessary for you to despise Spain to defend your points.

I'm not going to build more on this non-constructive Off-Topic.

My opinion is that this statement (cultural superpower) should be deleted if It angry you, and if someone later finds an acceptable source, recover it. OceanStones (talk) 15:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

As I said, Spain has lots of cultural wealth, we don't need a source to establish the obvious, many people worldwide study Spanish arts and visit Spain (and no, it's not due to British buying houses)...that qualifies in my book for having cultural influence and the arguments against it provided by Claudio are not on point here, as they are based on the idea that if Greece and Italy influenced others then the others cannot be cultural powerhouses on their own, if Europe influenced the US then the US cannot be a cultural powerhouse...that kind of reasoning obviously is a fallacy. The only issue I aknowledge is that the specific statement "Spain is cultural superpower" was introduced by blocked socks without a source. But this is a matter of form, not of content. We can make a similar point without using a specialistic concept. Denying the existence of Spanish cultural influence and wealth is just plainly wrong. Barjimoa (talk) 15:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

A country isn't a cultural superpower because people speak the language that originated there or because people visit it. The overwhelming majority of native Spanish speakers aren't Spanish, and most people who learn it have Latin America, not Spain, in mind. Millions visit Iceland, does that make it a cultural superpower? Regarding your comment about my knowledge of history, that brings up exactly one of my points: the sentence is in the present tense. Spain had a huge cultural impact. I'm talking about today. Largoplazo (talk) 16:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

We can remove that sentence if it's/as long as it is sourceless, apparently no one has a problem with that. Keeping the context of Spain having a significant culture is what matters, no need to fight over a specific definition. I personally was just pushing back against the bias of that user, who, to my shock, has been blocked for being himself the guy who introduced that very sentence in the first place. He was trolling and flaming all of us. Barjimoa (talk) 16:38, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@Largoplazo It seems like you're confusing being a political/economic Superpower with being a cultural Superpower. Language and tourism are obviously important factors to be a cultural Superpower.

Language is probably one of the most obvious cultural projections that exist for a country. It is not credible to say that people study Spanish without thinking about Spain. Also comparing Iceland's tourism (about 3 million a year) with Spain (85 million a year) seems quite absurd to me. Spain is the second-most visited country in the World precisely because of its cultural influence.

Its not even a serious debate. It is quite obvious that Spain is one of the major cultural powers. The only issue is that the current sources do not affirm that and it was added by a Sockpuppet that has flamed here against Spain. OceanStones (talk) 16:44, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If you think I'm confusing the two then you can't possibly have really read my original message, where I touched on nearly all the subtopics in the Culture section and said nothing about politics or the economy, at all Largoplazo (talk) 17:20, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh my God! People sometimes think of Spain! They're aware of it!

Re It's not even a serious debate. It is quite obvious ...: The fact that multiple people disagree with you and that I have clearly listed substantive counterpoints indicates ipso facto that neither of those sentences is true. Largoplazo (talk) 16:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

PD: And all this ignoring the fact that Spain has also an important weight in sports, gastronomy and music (Ex. Flamenco, which is more popular outside of Spain than inside), lmao OceanStones (talk) 16:54, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Why are you now being the one causing a flame? The way you speak strongly reminds me of the historic blocked user of which Claudio has been established to be a sock...and you have been created while there is an ongoing investigation on his socks AND a debate at this talk page caused by him...I strongly suspect you have been specifically created to contribute to this whole flame. Like, are you are playing all sides in this? That's some next level. User:Bbb23, can you please check him too? What's going on here? I feel like I, user:Largoplazo and user:Moxy are being trolled hard into this. I have no words. Barjimoa (talk) 16:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Exactly who have I attacked? I don't see any of my words as an attack.

The most I have said was "it discredits you as educated in history" and it was directed at the now blocked @Claudio di Roma.

Feel free to check whatever you want. OceanStones (talk) 17:08, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I am convinced that's you. The way you speak. I don't even know what to say. This whole exchange was just pure flame for no reason. Barjimoa (talk) 17:12, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Imagine how desperate for attention a person would be to spend so much time creating dozens of sockpuppets and engaging in such lame antics. Truly pathetic. Carlstak (talk) 00:08, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Carlstak, it's even worse, he has had hundreds. Barjimoa (talk) 08:49, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Sad. No one with a life outside WP would bother. Carlstak (talk) 11:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Wait, User:Claudio di Roma has been blocked for being himself one of the many socks of the guy who introduced the claim, that's quite a turn of events. Barjimoa (talk) 16:03, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Let's remove it from the lead altogether and in the body remove and a cultural superpower.(bad sources) and replace it with Spain is a Western country and one of the major Latin countries of Europe and has been noted for its international cultural influence.Moxy🍁 17:01, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

It's fine to me, it's the same thing really, we don't have to fight over specific words and concepts. Especially considered we are very likely being trolled. Barjimoa (talk) 17:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

The claim seems to have been introduced with this edit by User:Kfager1, who was later blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Jobas, but who a cursory review of their contributions doesn't reveal to have had an special interest in aggrandizing Spain. Claudio di Roma has made only this one edit to this article, and it was to remove "cultural" in front of "superpower" and the change the phrase, properly, from present tense to past tense. So Claudio di Roma didn't introduce the claim and didn't do anything here to magnify Spain. Largoplazo (talk) 16:55, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Largoplazo , the claim was introduced by VeneziaFriulano and TechnicianGB at the Power (international relations) page after a talk. It turns out that Claudio di Roma is a sock of James Oredan, hence of Venezia. He was trolling us. He was playing both sides. Barjimoa (talk) 16:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

@Barjimoa: If you're satisfied that the evidence is clear, are you going to file a sockpuppet investigation report? Largoplazo (talk 19:37, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Well now luckily there is no need to, because it's been being noticed and blocked for being a sock of James/Venezia by admins independently of this. Barjimoa (talk) 19:54, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2024

Request to add a new wiki subsection titled

Main article: Mass media in Spain

under Spain#Culture.

42.60.108.206 (talk) 12:00, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I kind of think this is summed up by the reference to Culture of Spain and unneeded, I also think that there's no clear section heading to add it under, but I'll leave this open if someone disagrees. Bestagon ⬡ 17:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: I agree with Bestagon. The quality of the Mass media in Spain article is pretty low, and there's not much it has to offer compared to what Culture of Spain already has. Mz7 (talk) 01:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Origns of the name of Spain

The idea that this name means Land of Rabbits is ludicrous and has no bases in the etymology and travel of language. The original name of the city of Isfahan or Esphanhan in Iran was originally Sepana and since the Mithriac traditions were so prevalent in that region it affords and validates to view the origin of this name from that perspective. We know from documented evidence that various cities is Spain were established by the Goths and the Alans, notably Catalonia which as GothAlania, a group of the Iranian people known as Sakas (later to be called Saxons) and these interactions were cultural, religious and linguistic. The issue seems to be that the origins of names do not go further than certain geographical areas and tend to attempt to restrict the etymology within certain geographic boundaries. This is a skewed view and unreliable as it excludes the etymology to elsewhere other than it's nearest point. Konradbertam (talk) 00:40, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Are there reliable sources that support any of your claims? Are you taking into account that the Phoenicians were referring to the area as Spaniya many centuries before the arrival of the Goths and Alans and possibly before the name "Isfahan" came into use in what is now Iran? As for what you find ludicrous, why? There are clearly plenty of researchers who don't find it ludicrous. Largoplazo (talk) 01:56, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

"A group of the Iranian people known as Sakas (later to be called Saxons)"? You must be joking. Utter nonsense. I have corrected the information per the given source, and added info from Developmental Biology in Hispania (Spain & Portugal) by Juan Arechaga, published by the International Journal of Developmental Biology. Also, as I stated in my edit summary, we should not be citing journalistic content from a news site for etymological info, but rather the experts quoted in the news article. Carlstak (talk) 04:00, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Major metropolitan areas in Spain

Spain's capital and largest city is Madrid, and other major urban areas include Barcelona, Valencia, and Zaragoza. Manuelfr (talk) 22:58, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Major metropolitan areas in Spain are Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia and Sevilla, but Zaragoza isn't. So, you must change Zaragoza to Seville

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Amortias (T)(C) 05:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:%C3%81reas_metropolitanas_de_Espa%C3%B1a Manuelfr (talk) 07:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Changing the name of Spain to Andalusia

Spain is a colonial name of Andalusia of the Islamic Caliphate. Its not exist. Please change the name to Andalusia the not colonial name 188.64.206.0 (talk) 15:05, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Dear Wikipedia user. Kindly check accurate sources prior to making this kind of comments. While the Spanish constitution does not establish an official name for the state of Spain and some others are commonly used in it. While the origin of the word might be uncertain, the hypothesis of the Phoenician word "Land of rabbits" Spania is commonly accepted. Dual2402 (talk) 08:22, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello. We, following the guidelines of WP:COMMONNAME, go by what places are most commonly called, not what someone reasons out they should be called. Largoplazo (talk) 12:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Lads, you took the bait. Look where the IP is from. Look at what happened between Spain and that place on 28 May 2024. WP:DENY. Unknown Temptation (talk) 21:33, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

@User:Unknown Temptation How do I look where the IP is from? Uporządnicki (talk) 02:20, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Is there a reason you felt the need to be cryptic instead of just saying that the IP is from Israel and it was the day that Spain recognized Palestine? Largoplazo (talk) 12:17, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Don't feed the trolls. Miiversal (talk) 12:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Number of World Heritage Sites in Spain

Change the number of World Heritage Sites in the Culture section in the World Heritage Sites subsection from 49 to 50 as its own source shows. ArloSanders (talk) 17:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

 Done LizardJr8 (talk) 21:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 10 February 2025

Change: “Several Christian kingdoms emerged in Northern Iberia, chief among them Asturias, León, Castile, Aragon and Navarre; made an intermittent southward military expansion and repopulation, known as the Reconquista, repelling Islamic rule in Iberia, which culminated with the Christian seizure of the Nasrid Kingdom of Granada in 1492.”

To: “Several Christian kingdoms emerged in Northern Iberia, chief among them Asturias, León, Castile, Aragon and Navarre; they made an intermittent southward military expansion and repopulation, known as the Reconquista, repelling Islamic rule in Iberia, which culminated with the Christian seizure of the Nasrid Kingdom of Granada in 1492.“

Adding the word “they” after the semicolon makes the second clause independent and grammatically correct. As it is now, the second clause is missing a subject and is not an independent clause. Semicolons are to connect two independent (but related) clauses 68.65.169.178 (talk) 05:17, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for pointing it out.--Technopat (talk) 05:33, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Todo: Update information about electric cars

outdated sentence: "Spain aims to put one million electric cars on the road by 2014" 82.220.105.79 (talk) 21:21, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Update information about Spain's largest cities

«Urbanisation» section.

The updated data for 2024 appears in the table source itself. Gyu Den (talk) 04:08, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Add co-official languages in small upper right table

Spanish is mentioned in the beginning of the article as the official language in Spain. I am referring to the table appearing on the upper right of the article. It is explained in the notes that there are more co-official languages, but I would respectfully suggest to include them also in the upper right table together with Spanish. Many foreigners do not know this, and I think it is pedagogical to portray that information in the Language section of the initial table. Based on Article 3 of the Spanish constitution. https://mpt.gob.es/politica-territorial/autonomica/Lenguas-cooficiales.html

2A02:FE1:82:9400:D1D2:965A:7E85:99D6 (talk) 09:29, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Spain - Etymology

This article states that the Phoenician word for Spain was I-Shpania. The word for ship in two Semitic languages sisters to Phoenician are: 1. Hebrew: Sfinah (Jonah 1:5, Strong's 5600 [e]), and 2. Arabic: Safinah. The root for both words is SPN. According to the article about the Hyrax (Biblical Hebrew: Shafan) this animal is distributed in Africa and the Middle East, but not in Spain. On top of this, this animal has never had any particular economic or other value, and for the above reasons it is unlikely to assume that the Phoenicians named a region of high interest for them after it. The alleged mix-up between Hyrax and Rabbit further disqualifies this explanation. In contrast, the Phoenician civilization was built on ships and seafaring, and it is more likely to assume that the Phoenicians called Spain I-Shpania in the context of ships, shipping, ship building and seafaring. 2600:4040:5A7F:3800:BD19:1943:56E9:1F92 (talk) 00:52, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Wikipedia goes by what reliable sources say. It isn't up to editors to "disqualify" what those sources say by their own reasoning, we'd need other reliable sources that contents those claims.

I don't see how your association with "ship" holds up anyway. They had ships in Phoenicia, and they sailed ships to many places. There would have been nothing special about the Iberian Peninsula that would have led them to name it after the vehicle that they had all over their own country and that they used to travel everywhere around the Mediterranean. I'm not saying this to invite further debate here, which would be off-topic for this page (which isn't for developing alternative theories of our own) but to make a point: I don't know the answer, just as you don't, it's just my own reasoning. If reliable sources did support your ship hypothesis and it were to be included in the article on the strength of that support, it wouldn't be up to me to contest its inclusion based on my own skepticism. Largoplazo (talk) 13:04, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2025

In the info box it says 50st. Could someone please change that to 50th? 2600:100C:B054:E867:7D30:544F:2F0B:7520 (talk) 20:01, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

I was about to make the edit but then it occurred to me to check whether you're sure it wasn't intended to be 51st. What's the source, and what does it say? Largoplazo (talk) 20:06, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

According to List of countries and dependencies by area Spain is 50th, but there's no source. Tony Holkham (Talk) 20:33, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

I'll change it to 50th, per List of countries and dependencies by area as the area is unlikely to change that much in comparison with the countries above and below on the list. Tony Holkham (Talk) 20:44, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 June 2025

in citation h remved the fiale dvierifcaation tag. 45.49.236.6 (talk) 23:18, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. LizardJr8 (talk) 01:05, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Cleanup

Please remove unsourced and vague puffery from the introduction.--Asqueladd (talk) 11:17, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Asqueladd.

Personally, I don’t see excessive puffery here. It doesn’t claim that Spain has the best or most influential culture in the Americas. It simply states that various aspects of Spanish culture, following the Spanish Golden Age, have influenced Western Europe and especially the Americas — something that is indeed true given Spain’s history and colonization. It’s also true that Spain is currently the second most visited country in the world, has a large number of UNESCO World Heritage Sites, and that there are 600 million Spanish speakers worldwide. All of this, while it may subjectively seem grandiose, is actually factual.

What I do see as necessary is adding some references, which I intend to include shortly. Thank you for pointing out. JaierRT (talk) 11:35, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Delete this: Since the Spanish Golden Age, Spanish art, architecture, music, poetry, painting, literature, and cuisine have been influential worldwide, particularly in Western Europe and the Americas. As a reflection of its large cultural wealth" As a glaring example of shitty content, per Wikipedia content guidelines and policies WP:WEASEL, WP:PUFFERY, and WP:VER.--Asqueladd (talk) 11:43, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

I don't think that this passage qualifies as puffery nor that it needs special sources. I am all for pushing back against puffery on wikipedia, but mentioning that Spain has had major cultural influence, and particularly in the Americas, is a significant part of Spanish history and is fine if it has a spot in the intro. I don't think it's promotional either. I think the intro needs to change the writing style a bit: the wording is poor in some parts (e.g. "Spain made the first circumnavigation of the globe" should be "a Spanish expedition first circumnavigated the globe") and there can be some trimming (repetitions which can be eliminated, long phrases which can be replaced by short ones that say the same thing etc.) In this passage we have "literature and poetry" but literature includes poetry so it's kinda redundant (same for "art and painting"). This is about the style. For the substance, I agree with the user above that as long as it's true and it does not say "the most"/"extraordinary"/"the best"/"legendary" or similar, then the mention of Spanish cultural influence is not puffery in itself. Barjimoa (talk) 12:15, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

It is puffery, as a string of vague positive statements which no meaningful purpose other than set the mood of the reader positively towards the country's culture, rather than make the reader understand those influences (which by the way are less relevant to the topic than the cultural influences on the country) qualifies as puffery. It is also weasel wording unsupported by sources, sometimes laughably suggesting (although not directly stating as you can litigate with the plausible denial of "the Americas and Western Europe" part) stupid statements, such as insinuating that the Spanish influence in Western European architecture is worthy of mention in the lead section of this article, working as a whole as an onanistic statement ("cultural wealth"? JFC) unsupported by quality sources pondering on the pervasiveness of those vague "influences" vis-à-vis the presentation of the topic "Spain". In addition, by lacing up the aforementioned positive spin to the period-dependant, often misunderstood and misused term of Spanish Golden Age (itself a narrative historiographical framework with a positive spin), it anchors linked cultural expressions in Spain to a specific part of the early modern period, which also constitutes a form of original research). Bring quality sources about the topic.---Asqueladd (talk) 12:34, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

The point is that Spain has truly had a significant cultural influence in multiple areas across Europe and the Americas; this is a historical fact supported by sources, and even the article's body mentions that. Nowhere does this claim suggests that Spain is the most influential country in the world or that it has one of the best cultures, which really would be puffery and very difficult to justify (for Spain or any country). JaierRT (talk) 12:57, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Following a discussion last year, the phrase "cultural superpower" was removed from the lead. "Cultural wealth" doesn't belong there either. Do the leads of any countries describe them as a being stricken with cultural poverty? It's vague and it's puffery.

On the other hand, to the extent that Spain's history has been about conquest and expansion, it makes sense for there to be a quick mention in the lead of specific legacies it has left in its wake. We should just avoid implying the betterment of the world on account of this (regardless of personal opinion on whether these legacies are for the better). Largoplazo (talk) 19:08, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

I ultimately agree. While Spain certainly had an significant influence, particularly on the humanistic arts, in the Americas and Europe (as the references and the article support), the term 'cultural wealth' can be omitted, as it might wrongly suggest the reader that other countries have inferior or less rich cultures. JaierRT (talk) 19:41, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

You are obviously JamesOredan/Nocceta. Inherli (talk) 06:56, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Even if that were the case, it’s a very poor excuse for removing tons of content supported by sources from the stable version. JaierRT (talk) 09:20, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

You are using a children's encyclopedia as a source. Inherli (talk) 10:47, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

The Encyclopaedia Britannica is a perfectly valid and widely used source. Moreover, you are deleting official tourism data, official UNESCO heritage data, and the official number of Spanish language speakers. Stop vandalizing the stable version and edit warring. JaierRT (talk) 11:21, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Britannica Kids and Wimdu blog (a promotional blog) are not reliable sources. Inherli (talk) 11:39, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

They were valid sources, but even so I replaced the ones you didn’t like with alternatives, and yet you keep reverting? Are you aware that you’re also deleting official data from the Spanish tourism authorities, official statistics on Spanish speakers, and information about UNESCO-recognized monuments? You are directly engaging in vandalism and edit warring right now. JaierRT (talk) 11:49, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

All should review WP:COUNTRYDETAIL Moxy🍁 16:36, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

lets propose any changes here. I see fluff additions and repeated info added. Moxy🍁 16:44, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Please don't add any cites to the lead. They're unnecessary. Putting in just a few makes it look like the parts that have no cites are not sourced, which is untrue. The current consensus is to not have cites in the lead, and that shouldn't be changed without establishing a new consensus here on the talk page. See MOS:LEADCITE.

The lead is certainly too long. I don't know how much is puffery, but there is a lot of unneeded detail. GA-RT-22 (talk) 13:38, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

As Moxy and GA-RT-22 rightly pointed out, the article is long enough to make smooth reading difficult. In addition, it is unnecessary, per MOS:LEADCITE, to include cites in the introduction when they are already provided in the body of the article.

For that reason, I prepared a summary, which Moxy agrees with, that concisely reflects the referenced content in the body of the article. I believe it strikes a good balance between brevity and clarity, while keeping the key aspects of the country’s history in a clear chronological order:

Spain, officially the Kingdom of Spain, is a country in Southern and Western Europe with territories in North Africa. Featuring the southernmost point of continental Europe, it is the largest country in Southern Europe and the fourth-most populous European Union member state. Spanning across the majority of the Iberian Peninsula, its territory also includes the Canary Islands, in the Eastern Atlantic Ocean, the Balearic Islands, in the Western Mediterranean Sea, and the autonomous cities of Ceuta and Melilla, in mainland Africa. Peninsular Spain is bordered to the north by France, Andorra, and the Bay of Biscay; to the east and south by the Mediterranean Sea and Gibraltar; and to the west by Portugal and the Atlantic Ocean. Spain's capital and largest city is Madrid, and other major urban areas include Barcelona, Valencia, Seville, Zaragoza, Málaga, Murcia, and Palma de Mallorca.

In early antiquity, the Iberian Peninsula was inhabited by Celts, Iberians, and other pre-Roman peoples. The Roman conquest of the Iberian peninsula created the province of Hispania, which became deeply Romanised and later Christianised. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the peninsula was invaded by tribes from Central Europe, among them the Visigoths, who established the Visigothic Kingdom in Toledo. In the early 8th century, most of the peninsula was conquered by the Umayyad Caliphate, with Al-Andalus centred on Córdoba. The northern Christian kingdoms of Iberia launched the so-called Reconquista, gradually repelling and ultimately expelling Islamic rule from the peninsula, culminating with the fall of the Nasrid Kingdom of Granada in 1492. The dynastic union of the Crown of Castile and the Crown of Aragon in 1479 under the Catholic Monarchs is often seen as the de facto unification of Spain as a nation state.

During the Age of Discovery, Spain led the exploration and conquest of the New World, completed the first circumnavigation of the globe, and established one of the largest empires in history, which spanned all continents and fostered a global trade system driven by precious metals. In the 18th century, the Nueva Planta decrees centralized Spain under the Bourbons, strengthening royal authority. The 19th century witnessed the victorious Peninsular War (1808–1814) against Napoleonic forces and the loss of most American colonies amid liberal–absolutist conflicts. These struggles culminated in the Spanish Civil War (1936–1939) and the Franco dictatorship (1939–1975). With the restoration of democracy and entry into the European Union, Spain experienced a major economic boom and social transformation. Since the Siglo de Oro, Spanish culture has been influential worldwide, particularly in Western Europe and the Americas, with Spanish spoken by over 600 million Hispanophones, making it the world’s second-most spoken native language and the most spoken Romance language. Spain is the world's second-most visited country, has one of the largest numbers of World Heritage Sites and is the top destination for European students.

Spain is a secular parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy, with King Felipe VI as head of state. A developed country, Spain has a high nominal per capita income globally, and its advanced economy ranks among the largest in the world. It is also the fourth-largest economy in the European Union. Spain is considered a regional power with a cultural influence that extends beyond its borders, and continues to promote its cultural value through participation in multiple international organizations and forums.

Best regards, JaierRT (talk) 2:19, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Since there is consensus on keeping the country's sourced cultural influences of the stable version, while also recognizing the need to reduce the length for readability (per MOS:LEADLENGTH and MOS:LEADCITE), I am introducing a summary that retains the referenced content. JaierRT (talk) 8:44, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Formation of Spain

I think that the summary table of the "formation" of Spain should include the Visigothic Hispania of Toledo.

Present-day Spain comes from Visigothic Hispania of Toledo for the following reasons:

• The term Spain comes from Hispania. The Visigothic Kingdom was synonymous with Hispania since Leovigild, but especially since 625, when the entire Iberian Peninsula was conquered.
• Territorially, present-day Spain is within Visigothic Hispania, with its capital in Toledo since at least 657.
• Kingdom. Present-day Spain is a kingdom, with the court in central Spain, like Visigothic Hispania, with its capital in Toledo, from where taxes were collected.
• Linguistic unity. In Visigothic Hispania, the common language was Latin, and today, Castilian, and even Catalan, Galician, and Portuguese, come from Latin. The Visigoths also spoke Latin.
• Religious unity. Present-day Spain is predominantly Catholic. The Visigoths were already Christian but converted to Catholicism in 589. After the Muslim conquest in 711, religious unity was one of the main reasons for the Reconquista and the desire to restore the religious unity that existed in Visigothic Hispania.
• Legislative unity. Visigothic law copied Roman law. Leovigild's Code sought to unify the rights of all inhabitants, Visigoths and Hispano-Romans. The Recceswinth Code reaffirmed this, and it remained in use until the 19th century.
• Military unit. Visigoths and Hispano-Romans made up the army of Visigothic Hispania. There were even Hispano-Roman senior managers.
• Monetary unit. The Visigothic tremissis, bearing the king's image, was used as currency from Leovigild onwards.

After the Muslim invasion, Hispania disappeared until the Catholic Monarchs in 1479, but not completely. The title Imperator totius Hispaniae emerged during the Reconquista. The restoration of full Iberian unity with Portugal was not achieved until 1580 by Philip II, but it only lasted until 1640.--Migang2g (talk) 19:18, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

That's a pretty dubious nationalistic historiographical perspective, defended primarily by some fringe scholars (for example the Fascist monk and medievalist Santiago Cantera, former prior of the Abbey of the Valley of the Fallen) as well as a larger set of local far-right quacks. Infobox should not be used to showcase it, let alone mainstream it whithin a sort of fact-filled bulleted list with no caveats expected. I have to admit that, in any case, I think the infobox list as a whole is problematic, although it seems to be accepted as a custom in en.wikipedia country articles, and the current set of bulleted points largely suits mainstream Spanish nationalist historiography, which places the Catholic Monarchs as the "founders" of "Spain" (give me bigger quotation marks).--Asqueladd (talk) 12:55, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

The eight points I've developed are neither dubious nor nationalist. They are a reality. Give me a single source that casts doubt on a point I've developed. Another issue is that, despite these points, we consider them irrelevant because almost eight centuries of the Reconquista passed, during which Hispania ceased to exist.

You speak of Santiago Cantera as if he were the only historian who discusses Spain's relationship with Visigothic Hispania.

The strange thing is to find a historian who says that Visigothic Hispania has nothing to do with present-day Spain.

In fact the Visigothic kingdom from Leovigild onward, was a kingdom called Hispania, with Catholic religious unity, that spoke Latin, and had a legal code for the entire kingdom.

I can't remember the Franco regime talking about the origins of Spain coming from Visigothic Hispania. Maybe there are.

About Charles V, Philip II, or the Spanish Empire, ... they did say many things.

However, I have read in latín to Isidore of Seville in 624, the most important member of the Councils of Toledo, to be a nationalist, in his "Historia de regibus Gothorum, Vandalorum et Suevorum" in the "Laus Hispaniae" section:

You are, O Hispania, the most beautiful of all the lands that extend from the West to India; a blessed land, always happy in your princes, mother of many peoples ...ect. Migang2g (talk) 18:47, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

The perspective is. You have elaborated a detailed argument, based on 1) original research on your part; or 2) a fringe position on the creation of the Spanish State based on far-right quacks and fringe scholars. Thing is the mainstream (also nationalist) perspective traces the formation of "Spain" to the Catholic Monarchs (that position, btw, may require caveats not adequately displayed in an infobox, so question mark) with the merits of the creation of some common State structures (Holy Office of the Inquisition) in an otherwise composite monarchy. The mainstream narrative suffices. The fringe narrative is one fringe POV blob in a critical location of the article that we should do without. You are here to convince us otherwise. I suspect I won't convince you neither given that you are the creator fo a POV-WP:COATRACK article on es:wiki inverting the historiographical balance to suit your beliefs es:Propuesta del origen de España en la Hispania Visigoda de Toledo, citing indeed the aforementioned Fascist monk and medievalist Santiago Cantera and the far right quack Pío Moa to underpin the proposal.--Asqueladd (talk) 19:20, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm not far-right, nor do I like Franco, since, like any dictator, he's a psychopath

who led a military coup d'état, and hundreds of thousands of Spaniards died during the war,

plus the subsequent famines and persecutions, like my grandfather, who was imprisoned accused of being a red.

I shouldn't have to clarify that I'm not a fascist by talking about the historical connection between Visigothic Hispania and Spain, although what is certain is that it has nothing to do with the Spain of the dictatorship.

In the article I created that you're referring to, it doesn't just feature the sources of those two historians you call fascists.

There are almost 70 sources and continuous links to other Wikipedia articles.

So this isn't my point of view or my research.

Other historians appear in the article:

Alexander Pierre Bronisch, Ramón Hdez De Ávila, Daniel Gómez Aragonés, William Reinhart, Jesús Carvallo, Jose Javier Esparza, Francisco Vivar, Julia Montenegro, Raquel López Melero ...ect

Are they fascists too?

But I can give you many sources about history:

• Royal Academy of the history names Leovigildo as the King of Spain (571-586)
• www.todahistoria.com:

Since when has Spain existed?

The embryonic Visigothic Spain began to lay the foundations of what is known as the Spanish nation

• casareal.es:

The Hispanic-Goth Monarchy ... was the first effective realisation of an independent Kingdom or State of wholly Hispanic territories and scope.

• RTVE (Memorias de España) min 0:40

... For the first time, the concept of Hispania goes beyond its strictly territorial meaning and acquires a political dimension closely linked to the Visigothic monarchy. Migang2g (talk) 07:21, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

References

Protected edit request on 2 September 2025

Change the % of catholcism to 89.6% (total, keep % of practicing the same) Schmuck 172 (talk) 00:10, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Largoplazo (talk) 01:27, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Number of Spanish speakers in lead

@JaierRT: Why is it necessary to mention the number of Spanish speakers in the lead? It's an unimportant factoid that unnecessarily bloats the lead and doesn't provide any additional value to readers about the country. And no, there was not a "discussion" with a consensus of which the current lead crystallized as its outcome as implied by your edit summary. It's more like you simply proposed a version that hasn't been disputed since. Maxeto0910 (talk) 16:09, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

• A proposal was made to shorten the lead by summarizing prior content while retaining mention of Spain’s cultural influence; this was discussed verbatim here: .
• The question, rather, is why the Spain article should remove the statement that its national language is a world language spoken by hundreds of millions of people. This is an important cultural aspect of the country, and the brief mention does not unduly burden readers. JaierRT (talk) 16:43, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  The funny part is that there isn't a single comment from another editor after you posted your proposal for the lead. That doesn't imply a consensus for your proposal; it only means that no other user has disputed your version. Until now.
  
  Why the lead shouldn't mention the number of Spanish speakers? Because this article is about the country of Spain. Not about the Spanish language. Therefore, the lead should focus on Spain-specific content. Maxeto0910 (talk) 17:21, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  Spanish is central to Spain’s culture. I’d understand the concern if the lead went into extended detail about the language, but it includes only a brief mention of its global reach. JaierRT (talk) 17:25, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  It’s also important to note that the mention of Spanish and its global reach in the lead has been there for years; I didn’t add it, as you suggest, it’s the stable version. JaierRT (talk) 17:28, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Revising Wikipedia policy, the only point I’d agree on is that a precise speaker count doesn’t belong in the lead (see WP:DATED); it’s volatile detail better placed in the body. But per MOS:LEAD, it’s appropriate to keep a brief qualitative mention that Spanish is a global language spoken by hundreds of millions of people, since it’s objectively a relevant cultural aspect for the country.

Instead of saying "600 million", it should read along the lines of: "Spanish is one of the world’s most widely spoken languages, making it the world’s second-most spoken native language and the most widely spoken Romance language." JaierRT (talk) 17:16, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I disagree. That belongs in the Spanish language article, certainly, but that information about the Spanish language tells the reader nothing about Spain. As such, it's a digression. It's akin to writing in the Guyana article Guyana is the only mainland South American nation in which English, spoken worldwide as a first language by 380 million people, is the official language. I look at something like that and think, "So what? Who are you trying to impress?" Largoplazo (talk) 17:30, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Whether you find something impressive or not is subjective and personal. The Spanish language, and its global expansion through the colonization of the Spanish Empire, is a central cultural and historical aspect of Spain. Whether that impresses you or not is a matter of personal perception. JaierRT (talk) 17:38, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

It reads as though whoever put it there is making an observation for the purpose of impressing. How is it a cultural aspect of Spain that people speak Spanish in Peru? This is beginning to sound like the "Spain is not a cultural superpower" discussion from August 2024. Largoplazo (talk) 17:43, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I recently read the Portugal article, and its lead shows this: "Portugal's imperial history has left a vast cultural legacy, with around 300 million Portuguese speakers around the world. The country is a developed and advanced economy relying chiefly upon services, industry, and tourism. Portugal is a member of the United Nations, European Union, Schengen Area, and Council of Europe, and one of the founding members of NATO, the eurozone, the OECD, and the Community of Portuguese Language Countries."

Was I impressed? Not really, and that isn’t even the point here; the point is that it’s an objective cultural fact for the country. I don’t understand why the Spain article in particular so often attracts detractors. JaierRT (talk) 17:48, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Rereading it again, I'm dropping my objection. Largoplazo (talk) 21:41, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2025

Remove or rephrase the second link to Western Sahara in the last sentence of note b. Western Sahara was already linked once at the start of the note which makes it a duplicate link, and it is an adjacent link to "airspace" right after, which may be misinterpreted as a link to a single article.

If the context is sufficient to keep the link, "Additionally, Spain continues to exert control over Western Saharan airspace." could be changed to "Additionally, Spain continues to exert control over the airspace of Western Sahara."

SnowMod (talk) 22:58, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

 Done Removed the link. Day Creature (talk) 00:22, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

References

Images

As per the request from the tag, I have made a number of improvements to the images, mainly relocation, resizing or entire removal in an attempt to improve article formatting. To say this article was a total mess with images, sometimes irrelevant, would be an understatement. Goodreg3 (talk) 22:18, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Himno Nacional de España.ogg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:37, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

valencian

Question, is the inclusion of the Valencian "language" really appropriate here?
It's just a dialect of Catalan with no real differences orthography-wise
Quinoa ❤️ (talk) 13:22, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

Updated to say Catalan/Valencian instead of listing them separately Flopgui (talk) 17:41, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

It is not appropiate. ~2025-43166-39 (talk) 00:44, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Capitalising informal region names

As there is a difference of opinion on whether Spain is (mostly) in "southwestern Europe" or "Southwestern Europe", there is a discussion at talk:Central Europe#Capitalising informal region names to which editors of this article may wish to contribute. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:19, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Western Sahara

There should be some discussion in the article about Spain's complicated relationship to Western Sahara, which by many accounts (e.g. the United Nations) is still technically a Spanish colony. Nosferattus (talk) 15:43, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Spain officialy abandon that zone with the mouvment "La Marcha Verde" 1975. ~2026-10790-70 (talk) 19:44, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Prime Minister

Hello. I'm Spaniard and I was shoked to read that Pedro Sanchez is the Prime Minister. Here in spain there is not a prime minister as in UK. However, Pedro Sanchez is officialy the President of the Government, usually named directly in a coloquial way as the President of Spain (there is any other president). I want to remind that here in spain, even though the king his the chief of the army among other functions, in real life is more like an honorific role that focus on the protection of the citizents and as institutional representation of spain in various events. ~2026-10790-70 (talk) 19:40, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

I was surprised that you picked up on a single mention of "prime minister" as though that were the only one in the article, but in fact the article consistently uses "prime minister". So I looked at Spanish Wikipedia and found that the corresponding article speaks of the position as "presidente del gobierno". Curious, I ran Google searches on "government of Spain" and "gobierno de españa pedro sanchez". I found that while Spanish sources consistently have "presidente" or "presidente del gobierno", as your comment would lead one to expect, English sources consistently refer to the role as "prime minister". This was surprising, so I looked a little further, but didn't have to look for as an explanation is offered here at Prime Minister of Spain#Official title. It turns out English does the same thing with the Prime Minister of Italy, the "Presidente del Consiglio dei ministri".

I'm trying to work out the reasoning, taking into account that we don't do that (or I don't think we do) consistently for all countries. Maybe it's a combination of "prime minister" being the basic English term for a government leader chosen in that manner and the fact that those roles aren't simply "the president" but "the president of the government" or "the president of the Council of Ministers", while English considers "prime minister" to be their role with respect to the countries. That's all speculation by me, unrelated to the fact that English Wikipedia is using the standard term applied in English to the leaders of the government from those countries. Largoplazo (talk) 21:50, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

"spanned all continents"

• remove "which spanned all continents". reason: Spain did not have colonies in Antarctica or Australia.

~2026-16359-70 (talk) 10:43, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

 Done. I thought perhaps the original writer meant for 'spanning continents' to refer to the circumnavigation earlier in the sentence, but this would be redundant anyway. Prolabelmaker (talk) 11:32, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Mention of the culture

Many country introductions include brief mentions in their final paragraphs of the country's cultural influence, such as its language, tourism, art, and so on. See France, Italy, United Kingdom, etc

The introduction is a summary of the body of the article. That content should therefore be retained here as well, since it is an important aspect that is covered and well referenced in the body itself.

Thanks. Abatsuki (talk) 23:55, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

I second this. I've been seeing unjustified reversions lately in this page and this is yet another one of them Kidiawipekidiawipe (talk) 00:26, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

See about the "cultural superpower" WP:PUFFERY. Largoplazo (talk) 04:03, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

I think the current shorter version is good, and I agree to avoid puffery/peacock language. However, on the culture stuff, I said then and I remain of the idea that I am not opposed to refer to Spain as "a cultural superpower" with a line in the intro about Spanish arts, language and tourism . I don't necessarily see it as puffery/peacock if it does not say "the most, greatest, best country/power/people". If "a cultural superpower" is qualified as puffery, then it should also be removed from other articles like the Jamaica, Italy, Korea and US ones, out of consistency. Barjimoa (talk) 07:24, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

I agree with Barjimoa. Wikipedia should aim for neutrality and consistency, so I support moderating the wording where necessary. That said, describing Spain as a "cultural superpower" is not puffery, since doesn't describe Spain as "the best" culture or similar. The same kind of characterization is commonly applied to countries such as Italy, France, Japan, or the United States, among others. In this context, for Spain, the term is well established and It is supported by reliable sources cited in the article. Abatsuki (talk) 08:32, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

"Cultural superpower" has no objective meaning and is about as puffy as puffery can be. Largoplazo (talk) 13:48, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Speaking in this more at length: I earliest my history browsing has turned up the phrase "cultural superpower" was November 17, 2022, when it was introduced in this edit by a user who, three months later, was globally locked as a sockpuppet of another globally locked user. Then the discussion I linked above took place. Strangely, at least three of the accounts participating in that discussion, covering both sides of the matter and bickering with each other, were all determined, as the discussion was happening, to be socks of JamesOredan (not the same master as the first sock I mentioned was tied to). The remaining participants all, or nearly all, agreed on the unsuitability of the phrase. So its removal was not "unjustified". In addition, the discussion took place less than two years after the addition. In other words, not very longstanding. Largoplazo (talk) 17:16, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

What do you think of this wording?

• Briefly mention the Spanish Golden Age, as it is a relevant period in the country's history.
• Include a very short description of the reach of the Spanish language, without using figures, as these are unnecessary and may change over time.
• Briefly refer to tourism and heritage, eliminating references about being popular among europeans.
• Everything else has also been removed to make the wording more concise and readable.

"Since the Spanish Golden Age (Siglo de Oro), Spanish culture has been influential worldwide, particularly in Western Europe and the Americas. The Spanish language is the world's second-most spoken native language and the most widely spoken Romance language. Spain is the world's second-most visited country and hosts one of the largest numbers of UNESCO World Heritage Sites.

Spain is a secular parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy, with King Felipe VI as head of state. A developed country, Spain has a high nominal per capita income globally, and its economy ranks the fourth-largest in the EU and among the largest in the world. Spain is considered a cultural superpower with an influence that extends beyond its borders, and promote its cultural value through participation in multiple international organisations and forums"

Thanks. Abatsuki (talk) 08:37, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

It's puffery, it's peacock, reads like chauvinism, it's weasel and it's high time that we move away for good from these James Oredan-infected topics #culturalsuperpower #spanishgoldenage #heritagesize (prior attempts stirred by the stonewalling of James Oredan socks made them a massive waste of time for editors in the past). The litmus test of all this rubbish is that it attempts to assess the importance of "culture" and "influence" without putting forward any substance non-correlating to self-aggrandizement. What if we could tackle countries in more meaningful terms than being caskets for hosting heritage items to be showcased, boasting about vague influences in other places before advancing any understanding of it in domestic terms, and whatnot.--Asqueladd (talk) 10:25, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Chauvinism? Those are quite strong words. At no point does the text claim, nor suggest, that Spain is better than other countries.

• Why can the introductions of Italy, France, Korea, Japan, the United Kingdom, and Jamaica be described as "cultural superpowers", while Spain cannot, even when the claim is properly sourced?
• Why is it considered unacceptable to refer to the Spanish Golden Age in Spain's introduction, while there is no issue with mentioning the Dutch Golden Age in the introduction to the Netherlands?
• Why can Spain's tourism not be mentioned in the introduction, while there is no problem doing so for France, Italy, or Turkey?

I believe we should aim for consistency across Wikipedia. Abatsuki (talk) 10:57, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

I couldn't care less about the introductions of Italy, France, Korea, Japan, the United Kingdom, and Jamaica (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). Re-added content contains distillated puffery here, in Botswana, and on Pluto. This article has been sadly hijacked for so long by the vision of a blocked account and its sock puppet accounts, and hopefully this iteration be the last.--Asqueladd (talk) 10:33, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Read carefully what WP:Puffery actually means on Wikipedia, rather than your own interpretation of it, and why it does not apply in this case. Thank you. Abatsuki (talk) 10:48, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

I know what puffery is. Don't gaslight me. Largoplazo (talk) 13:27, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

If you were less defensive, acted in good faith, and above all paid even minimal attention, you would have seen that my reply was addressed to the user Asqueladd, not to you. Be more careful next time before accusing someone of gaslighting. Abatsuki (talk) 15:27, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

To be overly strict and pedantic about WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, to the extent that the article on Spain lacks an introduction highlighting its cultural significance—when other countries do have one—is to have little understanding of how Wikipedia works. In fact, the superpower article describes Spain as a cultural superpower, so not including this in the Spain article due to Wikipedia’s policies (not rules) is like not listing Joe Biden as Trump’s successor and predecessor as President of the United States. Wikipedia must be understood as a system, rather than adopting an attitude of ‘I couldn’t care less what other articles say’.

Spain is the fifth country in the world with the most UNESCO World Heritage sites, the second most visited country in the world (and not just because of its good beaches and parties), Spanish is the second most widely spoken native language in the world, one of the best-selling books in history is Don Quixote, and the government of a part of the world for several centuries allowed its culture to spread to a very significant territorial extent. Failing to take this into account in the lead allows for an inaccurate and incomplete understanding of a country, and I don't believe that is the purpose of an encyclopaedia. You don’t want to use "cultural superpower" term? Well, we can debate that. But failing to describe anything at all is a mistake. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:37, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

To get a complete understanding of any subject, you're supposed to read the whole article. The lead is supposed to be a brief summary. It can't contain all the details. Largoplazo (talk) 17:02, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

You’ve misunderstood. It’s just a brief mention of the country’s cultural impact; obviously, it’s not meant to go into detail. what do you think the lead is for? _-_Alsor (talk) 17:32, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Why don't we just simply state some facts without a label... add links to all these topics?Spain's cultural exports are highlighted by fashion, high-quality agricultural goods, and creative industries such as television, music, and art.Moxy🍁 16:51, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Taking everyone's comments into account, including the last comment of Alsor97, I think a good compromise would be to keep the country's cultural references in the introduction (the Siglo de Oro period, tourism figures, heritage, and language), while rephrasing the label "cultural superpower" (which seems to be the most contentious term here) to something similar like Moxy suggested. What do you think?

Thanks. Abatsuki (talk) 14:22, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Abatsuki, it's fine to me, I don't see the problem. Such things are normal for the intro/summary of country articles. This stuff can be written without puffery, it's not puffery in itself. Barjimoa (talk) 22:19, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2026

In the lead, immediately after the existing sentence "With the restoration of democracy and entry into the EU, Spain experienced a major economic boom and social transformation.", please add the following cultural mention to the lead, as it summarizes material already covered in the article body (see the Culture section):

"Spanish culture has been influential since the Spanish Golden Age (Siglo de Oro), particularly in Western Europe and the Americas. The country also has one of the largest numbers of World Heritage Sites and is the world's second-most visited country."~2026-30385-48 (talk) 00:41, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Done. Barjimoa (talk)

@Inherli: why did you revert this edit? You gave no reason in your edit summary. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 17:01, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

@Inherli: the content you removed was approved through a request. Furthermore, the referenced content you are removing is part of the body of the article. You have no right to unilaterally remove it without a proper explanation, as doing so constitutes WP:STONEWALLING. ~2026-30385-48 (talk) 18:15, 1 Jun 2026 (UTC)

For the time being, given that one editor approved of the multiply sourced content, two other editors object to its removal, and the remover gave no explanation, I've restored the content. Under the circumstances, Inherli should obtain consensus for removal before removing it. Largoplazo (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Abatsuki requested edit? many may think block runaround.Moxy🍁 20:10, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

I am not, but even if I were, would that really be relevant here? The request was approved, several users support the inclusion, and the material is already a established part of the article's Culture section (It is not new content), it would simply be briefly summarized in the lead.

@Inherli: appears to be actively patrolling and reverting multiple users like Largoplazo, Barjimoa and probably others, in order to stonewall the article, which could look like an WP:OWNBEHAVIOR case. It is important to note that he has not engaged in the discussion at any point, which I think is unhelpful. ~2026-30385-48 (talk) 15:39, 2 Jun 2026 (UTC)

Basically this is an ongoing content inclusion debate (see section above this one). AND...does not matter if one editor has implemented an edit request - it has been contested by multiple others now - thus by default best way forward is Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. That said I believe no one has contested my advice in the above section....lets get a few options there see if inclusion at all has support.Moxy🍁 16:12, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether you're referring to your last message in the other thread, but I can see it too. That approach seems fine to me. Together with the brief mention of tourism and UNESCO, given Spain's well-established international profile in tourism industry, it should be enough.~2026-30385-48 (talk)

@Inherli has again reverted the edit, without participating here. I've responded with a message on their talk page, User talk:Inherli#Spain and edits by block evader and asked them to participate here. It turns out from the latest edit summary that they were targeting block evasion, but I've explained that it's become more complex than that, especially since they didn't explain their previous reversion. (I also took issue with the Retired banner at the top of this active user's user and user talk pages.) Largoplazo (talk) 17:56, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

At this point, it seems clear that Inherli is ignoring the discussion and even the indications from other users. Since this is a clear case of stonewalling by Inherli, who is imposing his own version without discussion, I think we should revert his edit and restore Largoplazo's version as the base. ~2026-30385-48 (talk) 15:15, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Seriously, is nobody going to do anything about Inherli? He is completely refusing to take part in the discussion despite having been pinged several times, and all he does is patrol the article to remove information that is actually referenced, while trying to get the article locked under the pretext of block evasion. That can't be an excuse to refuse to engage in Talk discussions. This is clearly abusive behaviour. Largoplazo, Barjimoa, Moxy, Enćenćecasïdća, Darth Stabro.

Thanks. Léopold Favre (talk)

And this is clearly a new account created by the user behind JaierRT and Abatsuki. Inherli (talk) 20:47, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Feel free to report whatever you want. That said, you have been warned to stop using "block evasion" as an excuse to hijack the article. There are other users who want to keep the referenced content that you are removing so recklessly. Léopold Favre (talk) 20:53, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Given the considerable deadlock in this already lengthy and stalled discussion, please feel free to read and contribute your views to the dispute resolution request opened here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Spain Léopold Favre (talk) 21:37, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

References