File talk:Lenguas iberorromance.png

Map is WRONG

This map is a blunder. It confuses the dialectal variation in the Iberian Peninsula, with the worlwide expansion of the Portuguese and Spanish languages. Also it is plainly Wrong regarding Spanish speaking countries - Spanish is NOT an universal second language in the United Sates; and it is NOT SPOKEN in the Phillippines and Western Sahara! This map should be deleted! The Ogre (talk) 13:00, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Have you read it? Or, anyway, understood it? Maybe it is a bit misleading regarding to languages spoken in Spain, because they are shown over the Spanish yellow area (but one could just add that Spanish is widely spoken in the whole country) and, in the US, Western Sahara and the Phillippines exist notable minorities of Spanish-speakers, as it is specified. It can be improved (as everything) but not necessarily has to be earased. Qoan (dis-me!) 19:22, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Besides, why are Catalan/Valencian/Balearic separated; Aranese/Occitan separated, but Brazilian/Portuguese are not? The Catalan, Valencian and Baleartic are regarded as a unified language, as Aranese and Occitan, and the same with the whole companion of Astur-Leonese speeches --147.156.183.74 18:56, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Most of the photos of this uploader have been deleted. --147.156.183.74 18:57, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Point by Point errors

Well... OK. let us discuss here, following up the comments Umbert' and Qoan left in my talk page at the English wiki.

Firt of all, I do find it a bit annoying that some user can just create a map without anysource whatsoever, not respond to criticims, and have that map spread in some wikis (even if he did not do it himsel - I am speaking of Hidra92). Maybe I'm the one with a problem.

Secondly, the map has been added in all the wikis were it is present by Fobos92 (whose home wiki is the the Spanish wiki), except in the Ukrainian wiki were it was added by Yevhen.

Thirdly, two months ago I tagged the map as innacurate and started this talk page. None of my points were rebuted.

If I may be critisized for removing tha map from the wikis without discussion (I started the discussion that did not have relevant follow ups!), The problem here is more that anyone can just add any map and some think you can't remove it even if the map is full of blunders to say the least. The map must not be thought as beyond removal!

But well... let's go into the substance of the map.

This map is not acceptable for many reasons:

• It is not sourced.
• It confuses the dialectal variation in the Iberian Peninsula, with the worlwide expansion of the Portuguese and Spanish languages (the term Ibero-Romance languages is generally used in scientif literature to refer to the linguistic diversity of the Iberian Peninsula, not the worldwide expansion of two of those languages).
• It does not accurately depict the linguistic situation of Romance languages in Iberia (see, for ex., the points raised 147.156.183.74).
• Strangely it splits the Portuguese language into Portuguese proper and Portuguese crioles (while it does not do the same for the Spanish language - there is here a duplicity of criteria), and marks as being territories of those crioles Guinea-Bissau, Cape Verde, São Tomé and Príncipe, and East-Timor, all of them countries were Portuguese is an official language (and where many other languages are spoken, for sure, including Portuguese creoles; but should, for instance, some American countries be droped as proper Spanish speaking just because significant portions of the population speak Native American languages! I think not), and, as such, the language of the state, education and mass-media.
• If the map was to truly represent Portuguese creoles, then it is highly incomplete, and, for ex., Annobon and Bioko Islands off the coast of Equatorial Guinea should be marked, as Annobonese Portuguese creole is spoken there.
• It paints the whole of the United States (with the exception of Alaska) as having important minorities of Spanish speakers. It is not so, as the use of Spanish in the US is highly regionalized.
• It paints the Phillippines as as having important minorities of Spanish speakers - it is not so, and, to date, no credible source has been given for the use of Spanish in that country.
• The same can be said for Western Sahara and even Northern Morrocco (besides Ceuta and Melila, of course)! Please present credible sources for this (see, for instance, the past discussion in File talk:Distribución geográfica del idioma españolpy.png and File talk:Map-Hispanophone World.png)!!

For all these reasons, this map should NOT be present in an article regarding the Ibero-Romance languages. Such an article should only have a map, accurate at that, depicting the linguistic situation in Iberia. Other maps deal with a different issue which is that of the worlwide expansion of the Portuguese and Spanish languages. Thank you. I await you comments. The Ogre (talk) 12:56, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

All mentioned users have been notified of this discussion. The Ogre (talk) 13:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Nothing to add. I agree point by point. The map exaggerates the size of the Spanish speaking people diaspora (Why not putting Andorra as Portuguese Speaking (as done with the US and Spanish language) if there would be similiar (if not more) percentage of Portuguese immigrants in Andorra???

Why does the map split Catalan language in three different geographical variations but doesn't even show a single difference between the American and European Spanish? Why the Portuguese Creolles are represented and the Spanish ones are not? --147.156.183.74 17:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I personally do not see the need for erasing it even if I agree that it lacks several things, specially sources. As I previously said, it is to be improved. Anyway, if the rest of the people agree to erase it owing to fact that is inaccurate (wich it is), I cannot oppose. I opposed, notwithstanding, the way The Ogre removed it again almost two months after without saying a word here. Now, if people is against using this file (although I would welcome more users rather than ip's to consider the fact), let's it be removed. Qoan (dis-me!) 23:22, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello everyone. I believe that this map should not be used, not only because of its patent errors, but mainly because if confuses two different issues, as I said before: that of the Ibero-Romance languages and that of the worldwide expansion of Portuguese and Spanish. Yes, the errors I listed could be corrected, but it would STILL BE WRONG, due to the mentioned mix up! Regarding my actions, Qoan, I also oppose the insertion of a map that presents no sources and is full of errors. After my first removal, and given the fact that I started this talk page (and your first comment was not a rebutal of the point I raised), this map should have not been reinserted until this discussion had run its course! What you are saying is that it is better to have a profoundly wrong map in the articles while the discussion continues. What I say is that it is better to have the map suspended while the discussion continues! But let us not dabble in this procedural issues. Let us deal with substantive questions. My proposal, as said before is that this map should not be used. The map used in articles about Ibero-Romance languages should be a detailed map of Iberian Romance in Iberia. I concede that another map, or two, could also be inserted representing the worlwide expansion of Portuguese and Spanish. Furthermore, let me say that this map is very poor in the depiction of Iberia (either due to the errors or to the size of the representation) - and that should be was is depicted with most detail! The Ogre (talk) 12:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

In fact, a proper map of the linguistic situation of Iberian Romance should transmit all the complexity presented in the following maps (notice that I believe that linguistic areas should be the traditional ones, or else we would end up with a map basically representing, for Spain, the expansion of Castilian/Spanish).

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Maps representing the worldwide expansion of Portuguese and Spanish could be the following:

• 
• 

What do you think? The Ogre (talk) 13:21, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

A further question is if the map of Iberia should only represent Iberian Romance, or if other languages should also be present (such as Basque or Aranese)? The Ogre (talk) 13:24, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I got your point. Considering all this I think you're right about removing the map from those articles. I contemplated the map as a simplification, but yes, it may be misleading for anyone who doesn't know much about the topic. As to the last question, I guess the map of Iberia should represent Iberian Romance in deep, then maybe but not necessarily point out Basque and Occitan as they share most of their speakers with Spanish and Catalan. Qoan (dis-me!) 02:05, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'll remove the map from the various articles. Meanwhile I'll inserted the best overall map of Iberia in the articles. I'll try to work on a detailed map of Iberian Romance, but it will take some time. Gracias! The Ogre (talk) 17:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello to everyone, to assert nowdays that Catalan is a language spoken at the Valencian Community or Balearic Islands it is really more a political statement, (created and intensely promoted in the last decades by Catalonian Nationalism) that a scientific one. It has been widely accepted by means of constant repeating and out of sheer ignorance, but not due to any serious and independent studies. Due to its lack of scientific objectivity should not been taken into consideration on many articles.

On the other hand there are many studies availing the origin and self-development of the valencian language (officially named as Valenciano) throughout history up to the present day, as well as various well supported studies dismounting the theory of the Catalonian origin of the Valenciano. Some interesting samples everyone should read: Amparo Cabanes, los “valencianos” de 123. Ateneo Mercantil. 1976). Jose Vicente Gómez Bayarri, Historia General del Historia General del Reino de Valencia. R.A.C.V. Valencia, 2003. Ricart García Moya, Historias del Idioma Valenciano" (2003).