Talk:Tabarnia

A while ago a consensus was reached when writing the article's lead, among users like @Crystallizedcarbon: and @Filiprino:. Recently, user Danielhythloday has been making several edits to include this sentence on the lead: "The concept of "Tabarnia" is a play on the concept of the Països Catalans used as a historically-based concept in Spanish and Catalan politics." (edit 1, edit 2, edit 3 and edit 4). There's no source proving this. There's virtually no relation between Catalan Countries and Tabarnia. The Tabarnia organization itself has never made such statement. This sentence basically comes from the user's personal opinion. In my last edit I moved one of the sources he used (a campaign to change a square named "Catalan Countries") to the "Political Claims" section, where it seems more appropriate. He also added Catalan Countries on "See also" section, that in my opinion also shouldn't be there. --Beethoven (talk) 14:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

He also linked to this article. Its headline is El mito de Tabarnia frente al mito de los Països Catalans (The myth of Tabarnia versus the myth of the Catalan Countries) but, strangely, the article itself makes no mention of the Països Catalans. It makes clear that the Tabarnia myth is in opposition to the independent Catalonia myth. A petition for the renaming a square and an inaccurate headline are not good grounds for saying that "the concept of Tabarnia has been compared by its promoters and external observators [sic] to the concept of the Països Catalans used as a historically-based concept in Spanish and Catalan politics." Scolaire (talk) 14:57, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree, it should be backed by reliable sources, and even if they can be found it might be added to the body of the article but not to the lead as it does not define the movement. I have also moved the controversial content added by Filiprino about the alleged support by various organizations to the Tabarnia movement from the lead to the right section, because sources state that the support was only for the 4 March demonstration. The claim of wider support is original research and in any case does not belong in the lead either. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Support from PxC, Vox and SCC is clear as sun light. It is not original research nor it is for a single event. SCC clearly stated they support Tabarnia concept as they understood Tabarnia as being a fresh way of supporting unionism. PxC and Vox went to the demonstration because they support Tabarnia, not because they supported a demonstration of Tabarnia. I have added that content to the lead. Filiprino (talk) 17:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

That is your opinion. The sources state that they attended the demonstration. Even if wider support is "clear as sun" to you it is still original research, and even if that was so it is not a defining factor of the movement as they seem to be residual minority parties. SCC wider support may be more notable, but there are no references to source that claim. The information and the sources are included in the paragraph on the protest. The readers are free make up their own minds. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 23:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

They clearly state they support Tabarnia, and as such they attended the demonstration. Armengol, president of PxC said: "if some want independence, a totally respectable idea, they must accept the existence of a rebel Tabarian". Vox, through Twitter said: "The joke is over! Long live Tabarnia! Long live the unity of Spain!". Societat Civil Catalana through Twitter said: "Congratulations to @PT_Tabarnia for your initiative. Together we are better and stronger but the criticism of nationalism and more from joy is a breath of fresh air" and "Sources of the association explain that they maintain a "fluid" relationship with the Platform and that they consider their appearance "positive"". All three organisations support Tabarnia. Indeed, supporting a demonstration means supporting the purpose of that demonstration: claim the existence of Tabarnia and show the support for it. No matter if they support it due to being unionist or because they really want a new autonomous region. But probably one would argue they support Tabarnia because they support unionism, not the concept of Tabarnia itself. But that would be an opinion which through consensus would be put in the article. Filiprino (talk) 15:18, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

To add the claim of wider support to the movement you would need a secondary source stating it clearly and directly, and anyways, in the case of marginal political parties it would probably not belong in the lead. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 18:30, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Eldiario.es is a secondary source. And no, a secondary source is not needed for stating their support. There is no synthesis to do. Wider, it is a subjective adjective, how wider has to be their support? 5 centimeters or 50 meters? 1 person, 10 people, thousands of hundreds of people? You can't say that. But your answer assumes they give support, which is the topic of this conversation: "they do support Tabarnia?" and the answer is: yes, they do. Filiprino (talk) 19:56, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

It is really very simple, you just need a reliable source stating "X officially supports the Tabarnia movement" not X supports this or that demonstration or a member of X supports Tabarnia or said long live Tabarnia, etc... --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

I have already provided you reliable sources: "Congratulations to @PT_Tabarnia for your initiative. Together we are better and stronger but the criticism of nationalism and more from joy is a breath of fresh air", "Sources of the association explain that they maintain a "fluid" relationship with the Platform and that they consider their appearance "positive"", the only political parties that attended the demonstration officially were minority and of extreme right-wing, as is the case of Vox or Plataforma per Catalunya, "if some want independence, a totally respectable idea, they must accept the existence of a rebel Tabarian", "The joke is over! Long live Tabarnia! Long live the unity of Spain!". Official communications and recognition by secondary sources too, although that is unnecessary. And you have already recognised they support Tabarnia: To add the claim of wider support to the movement you would need a secondary source stating it clearly and directly. Stop violating WP:NOFORUM and inventing things such as "wider support". You are already saying they give support to Tabarnia and accepting the fact that going to the demonstration means to give support to its purpose, supporting Tabarnia. You want to be ambiguous all the time yet you keep asking for citations and phrases which do not add anything to the matter. When this article gets unlocked I will add the information. You are not accepting official communications from the parties and associations but you accept they give support to it in the form of giving support to a demonstration which serves as the purpose of supporting the concept itself. But additionally they have expressed support for Tabarnia itself. Your mental or dialectical exercises are just too much irrelevant, contradictory or obscure in order to be understood. Filiprino (talk) 22:16, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

None of that meets the criteria from my previous comment. I would see no problem however, in adding information to the movement section right after the sentence on attendance to the 4-M stating "that Societat Civil Catalana congratulated the Tabarnia platform on their ability to mobilize people during the demonstration, that they have a fluid relation and that they consider their creation positive even though they distance themselves from their methods and stated that SCC is a serious organization that does not wish to make jokes on this subject". Since the article is currently protected due to the constant edit warring, I could add it myself once the protection expires if there aren't any objections of further comments. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 11:43, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

But your criteria does not matter here. What matter are official communications. Anyways, you already accepted going to the demonstration means supporting Tabarnia. You also accepted support from Societat Civil Catalana. End of story. On the other hand, what you are proposing is to violate copyright by plagiarizing the article from Eldiario.es. And you are only referring to Societat Civil Catalana, forgetting Vox and PxC. Filiprino (talk) 13:05, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

You seem to have a problem understanding what other editors write. No, supporting a demonstration only means supporting that demonstration. SCC has a fluid relation with Tabarnia and thinks its creation was positive but they distance themselves from their methods. Great, that is what the reliable source says and That is what should be added in the right section. Of course in a way that does not violate copyright. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 15:52, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

And you like to think you are superior to others. You keep insisting in supporting a demonstration means nothing. You are disconnecting the demonstration from the purpose of the demonstration. That makes no sense. That is a true comprehension problem. And again you only talk about SCC. You know, you are narrowing the debate to one participant and removing all the parts you find contrary to your thoughts. The fact is that Vox and PxC support Tabarnia (you already accepted that by ignoring the argument of implications of a demonstration and supporting it by going officially there or showing support through social networks). They went to the demonstration in support for Tabarnia to demonstrate they support Tabarnia. On the other hand SCC also supports Tabarnia as they have relations with them and are kind with them and they think their existence is positive. They also support their methods. What they say is that they do not proceed with the same methods, citing the source: "they demarcate themselves in their ways when stating that Societat Civil Catalana "is a serious entity that does not want to make jokes". So in fact, they support Tabarnia and one or more of its purposes whatever they are, but SCC states they use different methods. That is what they say: "we agree with Tabarnia and we find a different approach is better". That is like saying you support parallel processing but instead of using NVIDIA GPUs you use Intel GPUs. The effect is the same. Filiprino (talk) 18:13, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

I know I am not superior to others, and I have nothing more to say on this matter. If you want to propose a wording for the movement section you can do so and we can discuss it. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 18:43, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Of course you know. But still you keep throwing red herrings and using Argumentum ad populum falacies when you want to claim the need for "wider support" and disconnect the support of a call demonstration from its meaning and purpose. I don't think anything fruitful will come from any discussion with you regarding the proven participation from Vox, PxC in the demonstration with the implicit support for Tabarnia and SCC support via social networks, press communications and relations with people involved with Tabarnia. Discussion concluded on my part. Filiprino (talk) 19:42, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

User Beethoven portrayal of Tabarnia, the "Catalan countries" and my edits on both are a missrepresentation of all of them. And in fact a clear show of bias. I did support with evidence the sentence I wrote about the similarities between the concepts of Tabarnia and the "Catalan countries" by linking to news that the representatives of Tabarnia had called for renaming the plaza de los "Països Catalans" (Square of the Catalan Countries") as “Square of Tabarnia”. This opposition of the concept of Tabarnia against the concept of the "països Catalans" is commonplace in the Tabarnian discourse. You can read about it in the following places, chosen randomly among the many dealing with this relation:

• http://tabarnia.org/web/blog/
• http://www.outono.net/elentir/2017/12/29/5-motivos-por-los-que-tabarnia-desquicia-tanto-a-los-separatistas-y-no-solo-a-ellos/
• http://www.bcnisnotcat.es/2017/06/la-vanguardia-se-hace-eco-de-nuestro.html
• http://ramblalibre.com/2017/12/31/elogio-de-tabarnia/
• https://www.larazon.es/espana/puigdemont-vs-boadella-choque-de-legitimidades-HB17437365

I can extend the list a hundred times, because the concept of Tabarnia was born, among many other thing, as a reflection on (and a protest against) the use of “Catalan countries”, a pure conceptual term, as an historical concept in Catalan Politics.Danielhythloday (talk) 18:01, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello @Danielhythloday: please provide a reference to a reliable source to be able to back the information you want to add: ""The concept of "Tabarnia" is a play on the concept of the Països Catalans used as a historically-based concept in Spanish and Catalan politics." without the need for original research. The source from contando estrellas comes close, but it is a blog and it is not a valid reliable source. Bcnisnotcat publishes some related information but not exactly either, the wording would have to be changed to include it and it would belong in the body, not the lead. It is also a blog, in this case it could be argued that since it is published by the founders of the concept it could be used. Since it seems to be controversial it would be best if you could find a similar claim from a reliable source and propose a new wording. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 19:03, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Crystallizedcarbon: I had changed the wording to make it more neutral, in the following way:

The concept of "Tabarnia" has been compared by its promoters^[1] and external observators^[2] to the concept of the Països Catalans used as a historically-based concept in Spanish and Catalan politics.

which is, I think, a fair description of what the sources say. Alas, this redaction was also deleted by user Beethoven, who seems to deal with the concept of Països Catalans with near religious awe.Danielhythloday (talk) 09:11, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Tabarnia is in no way a parody of Catalan Countries (article edit history of the article). If you want a parody of Catalan Countries you should search for the web page Madrid Countries , created by the same author of the web page www.bcnisnotcat.es, which you are using as a source as well ass tabarnia.org, both primary sources (those are the web pages from which the rest of the press started all this Tabarnia thing). Tabarnia is about independence, and as such promotes the creation of a new (stress on this word, "new") frontier inside Catalonia. Filiprino (talk) 11:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

@Filiprino:, your're missing the point. I didn't say, or imply, that Tabarnia is a parody of Catalan Countries. Tabarnia is a political construct partly based on a reasoning analogy with the Catalan Countries concept and its terminology, and the pro-independence movement built around it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielhythloday (talk • contribs) 07:18, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

@Danielhythloday:, there is no pro-independence movement built around it. The pro-independence movement is within Catalonia and claims independence for Catalonia only. Catalan independentists embrace the concept of the Catalan Countries, but they have not built up their movement around it. You still have not explained how "Tabarnia" is analogous to the "Catalan Countries concept and its terminology". What, specifically, is the analogy with Valencia, the Balearic Islands, La Franja, Roussillon, Andorra and Alghero? Scolaire (talk) 07:35, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

@Scolaire:, if you realy think there is "no pro-independence movement built around" the idea of the Paisos Catalanes, then you are misssing much more from this conversation than you can really imagine, and I can figure out why you find it so strange the use of Tabarnia on the other side. The literature, both scholarly and otherwise, about this originally "romantic" strand of the Catalan independentism that places the "Catalan Countries" concept (or myth) at its core is huge. You can take a look a simple newspaper versions of this movement in places like:

http://www.abc.es/espana/comunidad-valenciana/abci-mito-paises-catalanes-invento-valenciano-1962-201605021732_noticia.html

https://elpais.com/elpais/2015/08/25/opinion/1440524614_183088.html

http://www.vozbcn.com/2011/11/22/93663/que-fue-paises-catalanes/ (on the “Sense València, no hi ha independència” motto), or, if you prefer

Guibernau, M. 2002 Nationalism and Intellectuals in Nations without States: the Catalan Case

Albert Balcells, Catalan Nationalism: Past and Present

Luis Moreno, Ana Arriba y Araceli Serrano 2007 "Multiple identities in decentralized Spain: The case of Catalonia" Regional & Federal Studies 8:3, 65-88: "The Catalan Countries are perceived as a whole with a composite identity deserving political treatment as such by not just pan- Catalanist parties, but by the usually more cautious President of the Catalan Government, Jordi Pujol, in his federalist understanding of Spain."

You can see the term used in serious books of all kinds published after 1970 and financed by any of the Generalitats. The awckward use of the concept to write about anything under the sun (but mostly plants: "Flora dels països catalans", "vegetació dels països catalans", etc.), as if the word had some historical (or even "natural") base, is part of a sustained effort to implant this idea in the collectime imagination in Catalonia, Valencia and the Balearic islands. So, in a nutshell: non catalanists argue a strand of the catalan nationalists (the pancatalanistas) are abusing of the concept of Catalan Countries, an entelechy, to build the idea of a big catalan nation in the imagination of the people; with the same rights, they say, they can use in the political arena the concept of Tabarnia as if it had some material entity, to advance their own position.Danielhythloday (talk) 15:21, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

I said nothing about the "use of the term". What people wrote in 1970 is irrelevant, and so is the "flora of the Catalan Countries". The independence movement – the current one that revolves around the referendums of 2009-11, 2014 and 2017 – is not built around the idea of the Catalan Countries. It is a movement within and about Catalonia proper. I have been following events over the last one and a half years in British, American, Spanish and Catalan media, and during that one and a half years I have not seen a single report of a referendum on an independent Catalonia incorporating Valencia, the Balearic Islands, La Franja, Roussillon, Andorra and Alghero, or of any demonstration calling for an independent Catalonia incorporating Valencia, the Balearic Islands, La Franja, Roussillon, Andorra and Alghero. Keeping on about the "concept" that you find fake, and linking to random news items where people say they like it or don't like it, does not make that concept relevant to either the independence movement or "Tabarnia". And stop telling me I don't understand. I did a great deal of work on the Catalan Countries article, and I know all about its history, and the arguments for and against. And I don't find the use of Tabarnia "strange". I understand it better than you, it would seem. Scolaire (talk) 16:03, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

@Scolaire:, you have built your sanitized concept of the Catalan independence movement, which is a sociopolitical phenomenon as well as a political one, just by confining yourself to a very strict set of just political coordinates. That is all right if you are about to write a paper on the political side of the issue, but you shouldn't try to use this mental tools outside the very limited world they were built for. You fail to see the point where the concept of Tabarnia, which is mainly a sociopolitical concept, as it is the concept of "Catalan Countries" (neither with any realpolitik substance), intersects with your strictly political concept of the independence movement. No wonder. Danielhythloday (talk) 07:06, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

On the contrary, your jargon-laden claptrap is all right if you are about to write a paper on a "sociopolitical concept", but it has no place in an encyclopaedia. You have been told by five editors now that Tabarnia does not correspond in any way – sociopolitical or otherwise – with the Catalan Countries, and you just continue to repeat the same mantra over and over as if that is eventually going to make it true. Your behaviour has become disruptive. I am not going to engage with you any more. Goodbye. Scolaire (talk) 08:51, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

With this wording proposal you are not changing anything, but insisting on the same thing over and over. Your 2 sources have already been discussed here; none of them contain what you affirm. The first one is the campaign to change the name of the square, which is already included in the article. They are not making a comparison of the Catalan Countries (I don't understand why you write it in Catalan, when this is the English Wikipedia) «used as a historically-based concept in Spanish and Catalan politics» [sic]. In fact if you read the source, this is exactly what the Tabarnia organization said on their Twitter account (translated to English) a few months ago: Girona rebaptizes the Plaça de la Constitució as Plaça de l'U d'octubre. What if in Barcelona we request that the Plaça dels Països Catalans be called from now on Plaça de #Tabarnia? 📩. They are basically making a comparison between how Girona changed the name of a square (something they don't agree with) and propose doing the same thing in Barcelona. And that's all they have said about it since February. Now, regarding your 2nd source, Scolaire already told you that the opinion article itself makes no mention of the Catalan Countries. It's only mentioned in the headline. In the article the author is actually making constant comparisons between an independent Catalonia and Tabarnia (read last paragraph). --Beethoven (talk) 13:57, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello @Danielhythloday: both of those articles come from reliable sources, but as Beethoven points out neither one can be used to reference the text you propose. To avoid original research you must provide a reliable source that directly states the comparison of Tabarnia to the Catalan countries by its promoters. It is not enough to assume it can be implied. No matter how plausible it may or may not seem, it needs to be explicitly mentioned by a reliable source. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 23:18, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Right, this is getting silly. Danielhythloday, any attempt at validating the Tabarnia phenomenon beyond what it really is, namely a poor exercise in gerrymandering that

• was initiated either as a satirical reaction to the recent pro-independence process, or a sounding balloon to probe whether such satire could hold serious water politically, or a combination of both,
• has no real footing in reality and can only appeal to the unlettered (and usually very acerbic) sentiment of people who have excluded themselves from the Catalan cultural mainstream for five decades, and
• has been successively disowned by the very people who championed it and is now only relegated to a residual core group of MSR/PxC/SCC/individual garden-variety neo-Lerrouxists and crypto-Francoists,

is doomed to failure. No matter how hard you look for proof to the contrary, the best you'll find is some "Noticias de Navarra" op-ed written by someone who has no idea what they're talking about or some Libertad Digital article written by someone who does have an idea but doesn't want their readers to. No paltry circumlocution or sophism on your behalf will change that. CodeInconnu (talk) 16:13, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

All that is clear from this conversation and from the reaction of Catalan nationalists in the media is that there is a pathologic fear that the Tabarnia political project may obtain widespread and committed support. At the very least, they find it extremely irritating and embarrassing to their cause. The constant attempts at ridiculing, vilifying or demonizing its proponents are proof of this. Their attempts to link all dissent to the far-right is beginning to resemble Godwin's law - note also the typically elitist argument of CodeInconnu above linking opposition to independence to the ignorance of the working-class, typically of Andalusian or other southern Spanish extraction.

The Tabarnia project does indeed enjoy the passive or hypothetical sympathy of the anti-independence half of Catalonia, although support for the practical creation of Tabarnia is evidently small. Its potential growth is directly linked to the likelihood of Catalan independence any time in the near or medium which currently is extremely remote - close to zero. A separate Tabarnia would only obtain wide support in a Yugoslav scenario of actual secession - The reality, most Catalans know, is that Spain will never break apart. Despite all the drama, Catalonia is no more likely to secede than Puerto Rico or Cuba are to return to Spain. Btw, there is a growing re-unificationist movement in Puerto Rico, I'm surprised an article has not been created on the topic. Miska5DT (talk) 10:39, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

"Btw, there is a growing re-unificationist movement in Puerto Rico, I'm surprised an article has not been created on the topic." Start by writing that article, leave the more complicated stuff for people who understand it.

But if you persist in painting yourself against a corner, it is very easy to counter both the arguments I definitely adhere to, and the ones you think I claim as my own: find me a progressive and psychologically sound proponent of Tabarnia (not a clown who was angry because he wasn't made National Theater chairman by the CiU government, or a party that is the rough equivalent of Falange, or an Opus-leaning bedwetter), and prove to me that the periphery of Barcelona is populated by people who are more educated than the Catalan average. You do either of these two things and I can assure you I'll have no option but to shut my gob. Meanwhile, the whole world is impatiently waiting for your article on Puerto Rico. CodeInconnu (talk) 10:59, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Codeinconnu for further reinforcing and illustrating my key points and offering yourself as a case study.Miska5DT (talk) 11:09, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

No reply to any of the points I've laid for you = fly away! No more time wasted on you. Go find me a pro-independence Puerto Rican. CodeInconnu (talk) 11:12, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

As of today, still there is no confirmation of what Tabarnia is except fake news, gerrymandering or astroturfing. Even the demonstration featured in 4th March 2018 was repudiated by political parties like Citizens. Tabarnia has only received support from Vox, PxC and SCC. Filiprino (talk) 13:21, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

I wanted to add that still it is not known who is in charge of all this. There is no relevant people doing any coordination whatsoever . Filiprino (talk) 14:29, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Filiprino, no support from any political party, not one euro in taxpayer subsidies from government (unlike pro-independence movement which gets millions, even from the central government FLA, it has been published recently) tens of thousands of supporters in first demonstration yet a few months ago you were here arguing it wasn't a grass-roots movement. What is it about Tabarnia that drives you guys so nuts? 94.204.228.165 (talk) 13:34, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

AfD: Nominated for deletion; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tabarnia. Filiprino (talk) 19:46, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Haha you gotta be kidding. Good luck with that. Might as well try getting Spain deleted. Miska5DT (talk) 11:33, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

I have found this article from Naiz in spanish language Tabarnia y la construcción del adversario. It makes an analysis of how it was brought up by the press. Two quotes:

«Tabarnia» es un concepto gestado en el seno del anti-independentismo catalán que propone (en principio, irónicamente) la secesión de las áreas metropolitanas de Barcelona y Tarragona (donde el apoyo electoral a Ciudadanos ha sido más importante) del resto de Catalunya [...] La polémica puede entenderse como la enésima actualización de la vieja tesis del catalanismo burgués contra el españolismo proletario [...] En otros aspectos, el proyecto de «Tabarnia» también recuerda poderosamente a la experiencia de Unidad Alavesa. El debate tabarnés recorre aspectos de las identidades urbanas y rurales catalanas y constituye, por un lado, la construcción de un muñeco de paja a modo de adversario independentista al que supuestamente se desnuda ante su incapacidad de rebatir las reducciones al absurdo de los constitucionalistas. Pero, por otro lado, se recurre a elementos de vertebración identitaria en clave de proyecto español para (toda) Catalunya. [...] El fenómeno Tabarnia (asumiendo que se puede llamar fenómeno a un TrendingTopic tuitero) es, a pesar de su fachada burlesca y caricaturesca, un fenómeno de diseño identitario en toda regla. [...] hemos implementado un análisis de redes sociales a un total de 155.424 relaciones establecidas entre 36.829 cuentas de Twitter que han participado del debate en torno a Tabarnia [...] Tras la aplicación de una serie de algoritmos, sabemos que se trata de una red muy poco densa (la mayoría de los usuarios no han interaccionado directamente) pero bien entramada (sus usuarios están conectados por una media de 4,7 pasos). Así mismo, sabemos que es una red de liderazgos débiles y con un discurso poco cohesivo, propio de un fenómeno con poco arraigo y con referencias difusas [...] En base a las relaciones capturadas se han detectado 12 comunidades estadísticamente significativas en la red. Mediante el análisis de sus líderes (los más mencionados), sabemos que la comunidad más grande, la azul, la conforman fundamentalmente independentistas como @jmangues, @arnauriwz, @jonathanmartinz, @CNICatalunya o @ericcatalunya. El resto de comunidades, las lideran usuarios españolistas como @tabarnia, @Bcnisnotcat_, @josepramonbosch, @dexamina o @DolcaCatalunya

The analysis concludes that the concept probably won't have success:

Muy probablemente no nos hallamos ante un concepto que vaya a contar con un éxito social arrollador, para empezar, porque no parece que los impulsores del proyecto se lo tomen muy en serio. Sin embargo, el rápido crecimiento y difusión de tal concepto sí da ciertas pistas de cuál puede ser un (nuevo) escenario de confrontación en Catalunya en el plano identitario.

In fact, did it have success? No one has mentioned it again. It has lost all the relevance. In a scale from 0 to 100 Google Trends puts it now at 2 points against itself, from the peak of 100 points in February 2018. . It's a good candidate for deletion or for a substantial content removal. Sections 2, 3 and 4 could be easily removed because it is not a political movement, the demonym is not relevant since it is a joke which RAE Twitter account followed suit. Finally, section 4 is already explained in the article lead. In fact, The article lead could stand by itself as an article and remove the rest.

Going back to the cluster analysis I linked, someone could add it to Wikipedia. It shows enlightening data such as what groups of people participated in the trending topic, what accounts, what concepts were transmitted and even what words where used by each group (mainly pejorative). This is quite more interesting than all the yada yada content present now in the article, which seems more of propaganda of the creators of the Tabarnia joke than anything else. 37.14.194.237 (talk) 02:51, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Similar arguments were presented before (check de CdB). What you propose does not make any sense. A quick search in Google news reveals that the subject of the article continues to receive in depth coverage from be mentioned by multiple independent and reliable sources. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 08:59, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

What similar arguments? I have pointed out many things. Please be more specific because your comment (opinion without objective facts) is too generic and, hence, irrelevant. 84.78.18.97 (talk) 12:36, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

I will repeat it one last time as this is not a forum. Tabarnia continues to receive in depth coverage be mentioned by multiple reliable sources independent of the subject, so your main argument about it loosing all relevance is moot, the rest resembles arguments made by a now blocked SPA account and don't carry much weight, as almost all statements in the article are referenced by reliable sources. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 21:02, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Then explain me this leading text:The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. And you also have to explain that "continues to receive in depth coverage by multiple reliable sources independent of the subject", because Google Trends, based on searches on Google News, is not reporting that. So basically you are making a false statement. And still, you insist with "arguments". I did not bring arguments, but facts. Factual information. I'm not using arguments. First understand what you are reading, please. It's you who are arguing, writing opinions. As I said I have pointed many things out. Please read sources and stop trolling. Wikipedia is not for trolls and you are acting like one. 84.78.18.105 (talk) 21:35, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

The neutrality tag was added more than a year ago, is clearly obsolete and should be removed. As far as the sources go, I find it hard to believe that you cite Google News but fail to see or choose to ignore the results of a simple search on that platform. Of the 16 results on the first page, 12 are from January! Some examples: El Comercio on 21 Jan, El Español on 19 Jan, La Vanguardia, The Huffington Post eldiario.es and 20minutos on 18 Jan, and many more you can find by yourself. Please stop wasting our time. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 08:46, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Google News is not available in Spain so I don't know what you are talking about. I feel you are biased and pushing your own whitewashing agenda. Here is what Google News UK reports: . And Google News US . The newest article is from 10 months ago from BBC News Catalonia Spain: Pro-unity marchers parody secessionists. Tabarnia was largely considered a parody based on a fake country, not a political movement: Tabarnia: A not-so-funny joke on Catalan democracy, Fake Country Carved From Catalonia Means to Mock Separatism, The Catalan independence parody with its own president, Tabarnia y la construcción del adversario. It went viral, achieving a trending topic in Twitter.Tabarnia It is remarkable that it was pushed forward by twitter accounts @tabarnia, @Bcnisnotcat_, @josepramonbosch (Josep Ramon Bosch), @dexamina or @DolcaCatalunya (Dolça Catalunya has an online shop selling Tabarnia flags ). But Tabarnia has not left Twitter or Facebook to become an organization comparable to Vox, Societat Civil Catalana or Somatemps. Please note that SCC, Somatemps and Tabarnia are related. Somatemps' members created SCC, with Josep Ramon Bosch being its first and current president. Platform for Barcelona's Autonomy was born out of the association Societat Civil Catalana (SCC), a unionist organisation with close ties to the Spanish far right and Vives was already there. I would rewrite the article to be more concise and with a lot less mumbo jumbo. But if it is going to be reverted I'm passing. Good luck. 84.78.18.112 (talk) 17:45, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

You use the same arguments as Filiprino, ¿Coincidence? Here is the link for the news search in Google: where you can see the sources I mentioned in my previous comment and many more. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 19:01, 24 January 2019 (UTC)