Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spanish Gibraltarians (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was No consensus. Cbrown1023 01:35, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spanish Gibraltarians

ATTENTION! If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

Spanish Gibraltarians (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

This article was deleted under its previous name, then restored via deletion review, then deleted again under its current name, restored again, also at deletion review, and is now back here for reconsideration. Procedural listing, so I have no opinion. ~ trialsanderrors 19:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep again... - Francis Tyers · 19:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Very weak keep and Rename. While the article has some POV and other problems, none of those are a basis for deletion. However, it needs some serious clean-up and the title must be changed. The article opens with the unverified unsourced statement that "The term Spanish Gibraltarians...is most commonly used to describe those inhabitants of Gibraltar who left (voluntarily or forcibly) the town of Gibraltar during the British conquest of this town from Spain" (emphasis added herein). The highlighted portions of that sentence are unverified and unsourced. While the highlighted portion may have been the root of the dispute in past AfD/DRV discussions, this whole introductory sentence (or statements similar to it) may be why this article has attracted controversy. Furthermore, the title is simply too loaded or may be simply inaccurate. The inline sources in the article contradict the opening sentence (i.e. the term used in the links is "Spaniards in Gibraltar", not "Spanish Gibraltarians"). Something like "Spaniards of Gibraltarian origin" or "Spaniards from Gibraltar" may be a more suitable name. Alternatively, the first half of the article can be kept (with some rewriting) and renamed "Spanish exodus from Gibraltar" (or something better/more appropriate), while the second half about present-day Spaniards living in Gibraltar can be merged to Demographics of Gibraltar. Agent 86 20:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep/merge. Seems to be a valid fork of Gibraltar. Based on the ramblings of the previous AfD, there seems to be a larger POV dispute going on here. AfD doesn't seem like the proper place for the handling of this article. (c/p of previous statement) --- RockMFR 22:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup Remaining POV issues can be edited away, but as I argued during the last AfD this article has a few clear references at the bottom (although references #4 and #5 can be happily dispensed with) and at least appears to have a limited mandate of explaining usage of the term. I'd like to see more line-by-line citation of course, but it's a simple and limited enough subject that I see no reason to delete it. Small historical ethnic groups deserve some attention, and this one at least asserts its own notability with a scholarly work and at least one newspaper analysis. -Markeer 23:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Delete deja vu, how many times do we have to debate this NONSENSE --Gibnews 23:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • And what if I say Echidna-strength keep! or something? Use arguments, not typeface please. - 152.91.9.144 00:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• • This is the THIRD time this has been debated, the article is worthless with the sole purpose of promoting arguments and edit wars. If you want arguments, here are some

• • 1. This is a repetition of the article 'Originary inhabitants of Gibraltar' which was subject to a successful AfD.

    2. The sole purpose of this article is to discredit the existance of the Gibraltarian people which the author simply dismisses as the present inhabitants of Gibraltar it is simple racism, promoting the often repeated Spanish POV that we simply do not exist as a distinct people.

    3. The title is an oxymoron. The term 'Gibraltarian' is a modern one with a precise legal meaning, to qualify for being a Gibraltarian it is necessary to be a British Citizen. As Spain does not recognise dual nationality its rather difficult to be a 'Spanish Gibtraltarian'

    4. The content of the article is rubbish, and it will result in an extended edit war the moment any Gibraltarian with a weak stomach reads it.

    5. The paragraph The term Spanish Gibraltarian is also informally used, in the UK, to refer to those modern-day Gibraltarians who are primarily of Spanish language and culture, as opposed to British ex-patriates living on the territory. is a total fabrication according to the 2001 census there are 326 Spanish people resident in Gibraltar, the view promoted by the Spanish Government that the place is filled by 'British ex-pats' is untrue - the vast majority are British Gibraltarians, born in Gibraltar.

    6. Its propaganda and racist rubbish, repeatedly trying to push 'being Spanish' down our throats is really offensive.

    7. If it keeps coming back despite successful Afd votes to remove it, this puts the whole process of removing rubbish from Wikupedia in question.

    Gibnews 09:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep and rewrite.--Sandy Scott 23:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep: This is the 3rd Afd. Please refer to past Afds for reasons. I would also like to point out to Gibnews that the main source of the article is written by a Gibraltarian!--Burgas00 00:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

There was me thinking you wrote it, perhaps you could disclose your source. I'm willing to bet it was not A.Gibraltarian the famous banned user --Gibnews

• Comment My brain hurts - in what way is this article different from the one that was deleted? Also, the restoration link isn't linking to the right article discussion. Robovski 01:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Ah, there it is. Nevermind about the discussion link. Robovski 01:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Pretty much repeating what I wrote in the previous AfD - There is a POV bent to it and I never like that. I always say that means the content should be changed, not the article deleted. I understand this is a passionate issue in Gibraltar (having been there, I've discussed it with locals), but this was a historic part of Gibraltar, even under British rule and that can't be ignored. This reminds me of the article Whites in Zimbabwe. That segment has heavily dissipated over the years and even if it totally disappears, the subject still would be relevant even for historical reasons. --Oakshade 01:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete OK, I've taken some time to read up on the overturn and re-visited the previous 3 AfD discussions (yes 3). I still don't see why this needs it's own article. The subject is the very few Spanish inhabitants who did not leave after the British conquest of more than 300 years ago and the very few people who claim to be thier decendants (and thier non-notable organization, the Heirs of Gibraltar). There is a claim that the term Spanish Gibraltarian is a term used in the UK but then provides a reference from 106 years ago to support this. If this information is considered noatble, it should be in the main Gibraltar article or a related article (probably best in the History of Gibraltar article). The article presents a POV fork in the ongoing Gibraltar dispute and doesn't belong here at Wikipedia. This is over and above the basic poor quality of the article itself. Please delete the article, please advise me when User:Burgas00 applies to have the delete overturned AGAIN or salt this so I don't have to do this a fourth time. Robovski 02:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete There are, of course, plenty of Gibraltarians of wholly and partly Spanish descent. There are plenty of Spaniards of Gibraltarian and British descent (there is, funnily enough, no attempt to create a class of "English Spaniards"). But this article is trying to create a class of person who simply never existed. A very few Spaniards lived on Gibraltar before it was ceded in perpetuity to Great Britain. They were not Gibraltarians, they were Spaniards. There was no such thing as a Gibraltarian until Gibraltar was created as a British Crown Colony. This is simply an attempt by those who believe that if you say something often enough it will gain a degree of credibility to try and undermine the status of the Gibraltarian people. Timbellina 20:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC) — Timbellina (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• strong keep The arguments against keeping it sound totally like POV. We do not judge political claims. We record them. "true Spanish Gibraltans" vs the ones discussed here. POV if there ever was.DGG 06:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

  comment I have been asked on my talk page to change my vote, on the basis of the political claims involved. This reinforces my opinion that we should have nothing to do with judging political claims. If a verifiable and notable group or tendency exists, we should write about it to describe it neutrally. DGG 00:22, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

There were no Spanish Gibraltarians in 1704, there are none today, if you call a Gibraltarian a Spaniard its a recipe for trouble. --Gibnews 09:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• keep. there is nothing unusual to have articles about peoples in one country with some external origin: Spanish Americans, Finnish American, Russian Germans, German Russians, etc. Spaniards in Gibraltar provably existed and look sufficiently referenced in the article to me. `'mikkanarxi 22:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete How many times do we have to have the same arguments? This article was already deleted before. What is this, keep at it until it gets in? It was wrong then and it's wrong now. There should be a ban on this sort of pressure bullying! Of course there are Gibraltarians of Spanish descent, but there are very few such individuals compared to those we might name Genoese Gibraltarians, Maltese Gibraltarians, Jewish Gibraltarians etc etc. Gibraltar happily is a place where one's ancestry matters not a jot. To introduce this sort of ethnic compartmentalisation would be wholly counterproductive to a society which finds it easy to erase from the common mind an individual's origins, and concentrate only what and who they are now. Gibraltar is mostly populated by British Gibraltarians. There is no such thing as any other sort of Gibraltarian. In Gibraltar there are no ghettos, there are no no-go areas for any individuals, there are no gangs based on ancestry, no socially unacceptable marriage partners. Kill this article once and for all, and have a prohibition order on it! unregistered user Ruiz 23:54, 14 Dec 2006 (UTC)

Comment:Actually Spanish surnames are the most common in Gibraltar and are much more common than Genoese ,Maltese or Jewish names. The Jewish community of Gibraltar is relatively small, being no larger than that of Ceuta and much smaller than that of Melilla. Still, I dont see why they would not deserve an article which documents their history. I, in any case, would support it and contribute to it. In any case, I agree with DGG, political arguments evoking the greatness of the Gibraltarian people are not called for. This article was undeleted because the deletion procedures were faulty and not based on consensus. Furthermore the arguments given for deletion (OR, racism etc...) have been debunked or are unsupported by evidence. I would also recommend editors to sign in or register before voting so as to avoid suspicions of possible sockpuppetry.--Burgas00 01:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

You want to throw around terms like 'sockpuppetry' you better be prepared to follow up on them. Who, exactly, would be a sockpuppet? Robovski 02:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Its not a question of 'evoking greatness' its the simple fact that the people of Gibraltar are called Gibraltarians TODAY. In 1704 they were simple Spaniards and they left. You just can't accept reality. --Gibnews

Comment:Gibnews, you should follow a principle in life: Respect the names people have chosen for themselves. If those "Spaniards" who lived in Gibraltar (understandebly) called themselves Gibraltarians aswell as Spanish, let them be so. Just as Kurds in Turkey can be called Kurds as well as Turkish, Armenians in Lebanon can be called Armenian as well as Lebanese and the Palestinian diaspora should be allowed to call itself Palestinian even though Palestine does not exist as a state.--Burgas00 16:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

DELETE Spanish Gibraltarians simply DO NOT EXIST. The people who lived in Gibraltar prior to 1704 were Gaditanos, i.e. from the province of Cadiz/Spain. The term Spanish Gibraltarian is an invention. The people of San Roque, where the main bulk of Spaniards who chose to leave the Rock after the conquest are Gaditanos and have always called themselves so. After the closure of the land frontier by the Spanish Dictator Franco during the sixties, most of the people of San Roque who worked in Gibraltar were dispersed to other places in Spain, therefore hardly, if any, original Spaniards who may have lived in Gibraltar prior to the conquest remain there. The town which was created next to Gibraltar on the other side of the frontier, La Linea (the line) was made up solely of Spaniards (or Gaditanos) from the surrounding areas, San Roque included which claims to house the real inhabitants of Gibraltar before it was ceded to Britain by Spain in perpetuity by the Treaty of Utrecht, who came to service the Garrison. Thus the same can be said of other little villages in the surrounding area. Galliano is not a Spaniard, neither is Hammond,they are both sons of Gibraltar of British Gibraltarian fathers and Spanish mothers. The fact that they have been described as Spanish is pure demagogy. In fact the offending contribution in Wikipedia can be construed as such, pure fabrication of a political nature. — Goey (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Comment: Gibnews can you please sign this last vote please? I also dont understand how you can make statements which blatantly contradict the sources provided on the article. Another thing. How can the people from the region (according to your logic) be Gaditanos and Spanish at the same time? How can Londoners of Pakistani origin be Londoners and Pakistani at the same time? Isnt this a contradiction since Pakistan is not in London? --Burgas00 16:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

You choose not to understand many things. However IF you are implying that I wrote the about, think again. Take a moment to read it as it debumks your article very well. --Gibnews 20:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Wait who does that last vote belong to? --Burgas00 02:15, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

DELETE 11:25, 16 December 2006 (UTC)GoeygOEYAll I can say is one thing. If this article is an example of what Wikipedia has to offer, I will, in future never consult or advise anybody to consult Wikipedia on anything. This is a complete fabrication posted by someone with an axe to grind, and which, if taken as true by any student or person trying to find out facts about the Gibraltarians, would greatly distort their perception of who in fact are the People of Gibraltar.

As to your comment on Gaditanos...People from Yorkshire are called Geordies are they not? It does not matter from what city or village they are collectively called Geordies and they are all still in the UK. In the same way people who come from the province of Cadiz, which is where San Roque,La Linea, Los Barrios, Algeciras etc...come from are collectively called Gaditanos but they are still all Spanish. Gibraltar is not a province of anything, it is a British Colony so we are known and call ourselves British Gibraltarians. Spanish Gibraltarians are an invention of the author.Goey 11:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)Goey 16th December 12.19 p.m.

Actually Geordie refers to a person from the Tyneside region of England and the adjacent areas, or to the dialect spoken by these people. The correct description of Gibraltar is a UK Overseas Territory not a colony, a term which brings unfortunate historical baggage.

I have mentioned this page to a number of Gibraltarians, so you will find their views turning up, albeit they may not understand the finer points of wikipedia formatting and style. I have been unable to locate a 'Spanish Gibraltarian' to comment, they are rarer than the Dodo with which they share considerable similarity. I just saw Bernardino León, he is in Gibraltar but is not a Gibraltarian. --Gibnews 13:51, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I think Gibnews and I will slowly manage to hack out a version of the article with which will be acceptable to all political sensitivities.--Burgas00 15:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I see you have blanked the page. Looking up the references you cited they do not actually support 'Spanish Gibraltarians' It may be more productive to let it go and move on to writing articles about something real. However if it has served as a means of getting more Gibraltarians interested in what is recorded about their history, then its been a valuable exercise. It certainly shows how little others know about the subject.

I understand you can get the publications of the transborder institute free by writing to them, as you have a genuine interest in the subject that would be interesting, although they do contain a lot of nonsense from both sides of the frontier/fence. --Gibnews 09:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

/correction/ The page is still there, for some reason it did not show itself, probabaly ashamed of the content. There problem is there is no evidence that the word Gibraltarian' was ever used in connection with Spanish nationals. You manufactured it. However this is not really the place to discuss this and I note you have reverted my attempts to make a honest account of things based on what YOUR references actually say. --Gibnews 10:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Gibnews, I am trying to engage you constructively on the talk page. Lets both make an effort.--Burgas00 16:21, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Keep There are a number of people who describe themselves as Spanish Gibraltarians and I have and more references to back this up. It looks like Gibnews is trying to push his point of view on wiki again - I suspect he is using sockpuppetery also Vintagekits 00:53, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.