Talk:2023 Spanish government formation

Copyedit tag

Hi Impru20 (talk · contribs), I have copyedited the first few sections to indicate the kind of changes I meant with the addition of the maintenance tag. I am happy to do the whole article myself when I get an opportunity, but in the meantime the maintenance tag is useful to 1) let other editors know their copyediting eyes are useful, and 2) to bring the article to the attention of the Guild of Copy Editors, which is relatively active and in fact has a improvement drive month scheduled for September. Thanks. Jdcooper (talk) 16:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jdcooper (talk · contribs), I have reverted some of your changes (see edit summary for reasons, but basically you have changed some sentences that were taken from previous GA reviews + changes to text that was literally taken from the legal source provided). My fear with your tag is that your "copyedit requirements" were basically a matter of personal preference (which is ok and I don't object to the remainder of your changes, but I do not agree that such changes require a copyedit tag as if the current version is wrong and in need of improvements without even explaining what those are). Cheers. Impru20talk 16:25, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The changes you reverted to the legal quotations appear to be purely about gendered pronouns. Since Spanish doesn't have neutral singular pronouns, I don't see how you can consider your version of those legal sources to be "literal" translations, unless you are claiming that the legal wording of the original Spanish text consciously and deliberately erases the possibility of a female Prime Minister, rather than generalising to male pronouns out of grammatical tradition. Do you genuinely believe that your source is implying that the Prime Minister has to be male? Jdcooper (talk) 23:47, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Plus, your attitude to the {{copyedit}} tag effectively defines it out of useful existence. If you are not comfortable with alerting any other editors to the article's problems, I guess I'll get round to it myself when I can. Cheers. Jdcooper (talk) 23:49, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me but: have you actually read the sources before accusing me of this? Please, check the official English translation of the Constitution (it is sourced in the article). Check Article 99. It is not my translation, I copy-pasted the official translation. The current Spanish Constitution dates of 1978. Yes, it is written from a male perspective that leaves a lot to be desired, but since it is a literal quote it is quite weird for others to attempt rewrite what the official text actually states (and now complain to me about it. That's what the text says, that's what the source says, it's not my version, it's not my fault!).
I'm absolutely comfortable with alerting any other editors to the article's problems. My concerns come more about the fact of what those "problems" are and if those are actually "problems" or "personal preferences" in disguise (which would not require a WP tag). After reading your response, in which you have made absolutely clear that you did not read the actual sources provided, these concerns are further reinforced. Cheers. Impru20talk 08:29, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I checked the source after writing my response, it seemed incredible to me that it was such an official source. Highly problematic and uncomfortable! But of course I acknowledge it is nothing to do with you, sorry for that misunderstanding.
Though I don't think its fair to frame concerns about the quality of English (eg. removing ambiguity, natural English style etc) as my "personal preference". I would have thought that should be the preference of English Wikipedia in general. Jdcooper (talk) 12:25, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So well, after seeing the result of the "copyedit" ([1]), it is indeed shown that an overwhelming majority of the changes are changes of expression and style that depend more on personal preferences than on actual "ambiguity, natural English, etc". Nothing wrong with it, but it is confirmed that the copyedit tag was absurd all along. We didn't need such a tag for this. Cheers. Impru20talk 06:30, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed

Does anyone have a source for the last paragraph of 2023 Spanish government formation § Second investiture attempt? Ed [talk] [OMT] 22:12, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some suggestions

Hi @Impru20! Firstly, congratulations on the article, the work you have done here is terrific. I wanted to make some improvements to the article, but seeing that it is under a GAN process, I think it is better to agree on the appropriateness of my suggestions and let you introduce them if you consider so. On the one hand, I have read some news pieces that related the dismissal of Iñigo Urkullu in November 2023 with an alleged rift between Urkullu and Andoni Ortuzar over the PNV's stance of the investiture of Feijoo. This story has only been covered by La Razón [2] and El Confidencial [3][4], which as far as I understand are reliable sources. Nonetheless, I personally think that the story makes sense in the light of the internal struggles that have developed in the PNV over the last year and a half. On the other hand, I have found the aftermath section quite brief, and I guess it would benefit from adding information of the eventual (non-)application of the Amnesty Law (a casual reader of the article could think that Puigdemont is currently living in Spain). Moreover, explaining that in the ensuing year Puigdemont lost the 2024 Catalan regional election and the PSC managed to form a government will be a key part of the legacy of the third Sanchez government.

Anyway, I hope you can get this GAN passed ASAP :D Basque mapping (talk) 23:44, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Basque mapping! I think your suggestions are reasonable and well-spotted; I will look fully into them later today or tomorrow, but I believe all of these would be a fine addition to the "Aftermath" section. I also absolutely agree on the connection between the amnesty law and the Catalan election; on the (non-)application of the amnesty law, this is something that would still depend on what happens with it (as judicial process are still ongoing), and will be something that will have to be updated more commonly as more details are known. Thank you for the notice and the proposals! Impru20talk 09:50, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I inserted the bit about Urkullu already (that was easy); I will study how to insert the Catalan bit in the most appropiate way possible :) Impru20talk 10:06, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think this was faster than expected! Impru20talk 11:02, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, @Impru20, that was quick! Thanks for taking the time to make the changes. I must say that the new aftermath section looks pretty robust right now. Good luck with the GAN! Basque mapping (talk) 23:41, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, as said the Aftermath section may still need expansion in the future as some events may still evolve (for example, if Junts ends up supporting a motion of no confidence on Sánchez's government, the evolution of the amnesty application, further inside stories on negotiations... elements that we do not know as of yet). But the provided feedback has indeed make it look much more robust. Thanks! :) Impru20talk 09:22, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. -- Reconrabbit 16:48, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:2023 Spanish government formation/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Impru20 (talk · contribs) 23:53, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Reconrabbit (talk · contribs) 22:03, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This has been waiting quite a while. I can see why. I'll give an effort to review it. -- Reconrabbit 22:03, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

  • Can this single sentence (with a semicolon) in the third paragraph be split into several smaller ones to be more readable? Following weeks of political tensions, which saw Sánchez accepting an amnesty law for Catalan separatist politicians convicted or investigated for events related to the 2017–2018 Spanish constitutional crisis and the 2019–2020 Catalan protests, he was able to secure the support of Sumar, ERC, Junts, EH Bildu, PNV, BNG and CCa to be re-elected as prime minister by an absolute majority on 16 November 2023; the first time since 2011 that a repeat election was not needed, as well as the first time since that date that a candidate was elected in the first ballot of investiture.
  • Under "Parliamentary setup": Media focus centered around the possible outcome of the vote for the Congress bureau when the chamber reconvened on 17 August, as the PP's absolute majority in the Senate ensured control of that chamber Somewhat confusing what is referred to by "that chamber".
  • Several voting mistakes became an anecdote How did it become an anecdote? Are these mistakes referred to elsewhere? This might be just an unfamiliar turn of phrase to me.
  • the Interior ministry subsequently opened an investigation to determine whether those constituted any disciplinary or criminal infraction What does "those" refer to? The APROGC statements?
  • Herminio Sancho—who had been a brief protagonist during Feijóo's failed investiture It is not clear in what capacity he had been a "protagonist", since reactions to his earlier voting mistake are not clarified in that part.
  • Can the ending-part about continued protests be expanded? I see very large attendance numbers for protests that started just after the investuture: https://www.publico.es/politica/100-000-personas-feijoo-abascal-protestan-madrid-primer-paso-resistencia-gobierno.html I also would like it if this paragraph was not just one very long sentence (Protests against Sánchez's investiture and amnesty, frequently called for or supported by PP and Vox, lasted into 2024, but began declining after several months, ultimately failing to achieve either of their main objectives of preventing the law's approval or forcing the government to dissolve parliament and call a snap general election).
  • Copyright: I'll have to check - nothing found automatically in English sources but I'll be reviewing the Spanish sources in my spot check for similarity.

References

  • Layout: Normal use of reference/notes lists. checkY
  • Some access dates ("Retrieved") predate when the article was created; these few could be fixed. Presumably this part was worked on in another place/offline or was split from a different article.
  • There are no footnotes in the text paragraph of "Opinion polling" section, but the references are obvious, so it's not a problem.

Spot checking

Reviewing ~5% of sources (16) since this is such a large article, with no particular selection criteria. Numbering is based on this revision.

  • [1] checkY
  • [3] checkY
  • [24] the article says both "a couple" and "five or six" deputies, either is fine so checkY
  • [37] checkY
  • [56] checkY
  • [88] checkY
  • [103] checkY
  • 137 this does call the speech "an attempt to reaffirm his leadership within the PP" but reads as extremely biased against Sánchez - I can't read [138] (El País) but assume it supports the other parts of this section? Orange tickY
  • [145] checkY
  • [183] checkY
  • [186, 187] checkY
  • [252] checkY
  • [257] checkY
  • [302] checkY
  • [320] better at indicating the decline than [321], though the latter is still a useful source checkY

Scope

  • Broad: Background of the government formation (the election), the subject of the article itself, and the aftermath and consequences are all detailed. checkY
  • Narrow: Deatils of all points of the event are in the text according to coverage by contemporary and retrospective sources (where available).

Stability

  • Neutrality: Language is impartial/no evidence of bias towards any group discussed in the text without attribution of statements. checkY
  • Edit warring: Little to no activity to discuss. checkY

Images

  • Free/Fair use: Government photos are usable with credit, Flickr imports have usable licenses. Diagram is licensed as well. checkY
  • Relevance: Images are placed in sections relevant to the text. I corrected punctuation in captions where it was needed. checkY
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Reply to comments

Thank you very much for your detailed review, Reconrabbit! I will use this section to reply to some of the aforementioned comments:

  • Fixes:
    • Can this single sentence (with a semicolon) in the third paragraph be split into several smaller ones to be more readable? (...)  Done
    • Under "Parliamentary setup" (...) Somewhat confusing what is referred to by "that chamber".  Done
    • How did it become an anecdote? Are these mistakes referred to elsewhere? This might be just an unfamiliar turn of phrase to me. Yes, these are explained just after the colon (Herminio Sancho and Eduard Pujol). I have, however, replaced "an anecdote" by "newsworthy" if this helps. Pending assessment by reviewer
    • What does "those" refer to? The APROGC statements? Yes, I have corrected the sentence so that it is clearer now.  Done
    • It is not clear in what capacity he had been a "protagonist", since reactions to his earlier voting mistake are not clarified in that part. Correct, I have clarified this in the sentence.  Done
    • Can the ending-part about continued protests be expanded? I see very large attendance numbers for protests that started just after the investuture It can theoretically be expanded, but even if some were large they had little impact thereafter and protests as a whole dwindled and died down after a few months (this is already explained). I do not think that this is that relevant to the article's subject (the government formation process), as these had little impact: only those that happened during negotiations (which included those at PSOE's HQs) were relevant in this regard. Nonetheless, I have added a link to the article on the protests, though, so it can be accessed more easily (it was linked already in a section above, "Reactions to amnesty and PSOE–Junts alliance", but I think this fits MOS:REPEATLINK for contextual importance). However, I will let you assess whether you think this should be expanded somewhat and what context do you think it misses. Pending assessment by reviewer
    • I also would like it if this paragraph was not just one very long sentence Split.  Done
    • Copyright: I'll have to check - nothing found automatically in English sources but I'll be reviewing the Spanish sources in my spot check for similarity. Perfect, will await for your review. Pending assessment by reviewer
  • Other comments:
    • Some access dates ("Retrieved") predate when the article was created; these few could be fixed. Presumably this part was worked on in another place/offline or was split from a different article. Yes, some was worked offline, some sources were retrieved from 2023 Spanish general election or from similar articles on government formation (2015–2016 Spanish government formation, 2019–2020 Spanish government formation) or others, so that is basically the explanation for it.
    • There are no footnotes in the text paragraph of "Opinion polling" section, but the references are obvious, so it's not a problem. Yes, this is basically a literal description of what polling shows, but in prose.
    • 137 this does call the speech "an attempt to reaffirm his leadership within the PP" but reads as extremely biased against Sánchez Yes... in writing articles I typically seek a neutral tone and balance, but some times sources themselves are not balanced. Nonetheless, in that particular case, sources describe Feijóo's investiture speech, which was very critical of Sánchez (so its content was ought to be biased against Sánchez!)
    • I can't read [138] (El País) but assume it supports the other parts of this section? Yes, in particular it backs the claim that "Feijóo used his speech to attack Sánchez and the amnesty proposal tabled by Catalan pro-independence parties", as well as the reaffirmation of his leadership.

Let me know about your thoughts on this. Thank you very much for your time in reviewing the article! :) Impru20talk 09:54, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

      • Thank you for responding to all of these concerns. One of the biggest, about how the later protests were addressed, makes sense through your explanation. The 'anecdote' is clearer now. I will pass this article under the GA criteria now. -- Reconrabbit 16:47, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2023_Spanish_government_formation