This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the politics and government work group. Catalonia C‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catalonia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Catalonia and Catalonia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CataloniaWikipedia:WikiProject CataloniaTemplate:WikiProject CataloniaCatalonia articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. Journalism C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Spain C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please take a look about that and update this wiki: https://elpais.com/ccaa/2017/09/19/catalunya/1505804572_958228.html http://www.eldiario.es/politica/CUP-directamente-Puigdemont-denuncia-Girona_0_688382083.html http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20170919/431400106696/operacion-guardia-civil-aigues-girona-puigdemont.html https://elpais.com/elpais/2015/10/21/inenglish/1445414318_195770.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.61.161.70 (talk) 00:45, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/01/21/spain-to-seek-catalan-politicians-arrest-on-denmark-visit.html I'll let the two sides fight it out on inclusion in the article.104.169.39.45 (talk) 22:02, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Moved to User talk:Nov3rd17 at his request. Scolaire (talk) 11:47, 28 March 2018 (UTC)][reply]

Carles Puigdemont's detention isn't a short-lived episode of a couple of days, so a new subsection is needed or the title of the subsection "exile in Belgium" needs to be changed. I would prefer to have a new subsections like in Catalan, French, Italian and (even) in German Wikipedia.--Nov3rd17 (talk) 19:57, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody knows what's going to happen next. He may be extradited to Spain, in which case there'll be an "Extradition to Spain and trial" section, or he may not, in which case he'll probably go back to Brussels and "Exile in Belgium" will still be the appropriate section. There's no rush. In principle, biographies of political leaders should have the same format, so Puigdemont's article should not be different than George Washington's or Napoleon's. Updating articles every time there's a news flash is a modern disease (in Catalan, French, Italian and German Wikipedia the same as here). I believe in stopping it whenever possible. Scolaire (talk) 20:28, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that articles about active politicians cannot have the same format like articles about politicians of the past like Napoleon. There's a big difference: The active politicians make politics in the here and now that affect people, so their articles aren't mere "biographies" but canvases about what they do now. And this "modern disease" isn't actually a disease, but an acknowledged part of Wikipedia, there is even a template for that (Template:Current).--Nov3rd17 (talk) 05:12, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article documents a current event. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses, and initial news reports may be unreliable. The last updates to this article may not reflect the most current information. (Learn how and when to remove this template message) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nov3rd17 (talk • contribs) 05:19, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That template is inappropriate for this article. If you were creating an article entitled "Arrest of Carles Puigdemont" (please don't!), then a message saying "This article documents a current event" should indeed go at the top, but there is no corresponding template for "a sentence or two near the bottom of this article documents a current event."

And no, a Wikipedia article is not a "canvas" or a day-to-day diary of somebody's life. There are newspapers, television news and online news for that. The ten-year test asks: "In ten years will this addition still appear relevant?" The fact that he was arrested probably will; the fact that he was in Finland to speak at the University of Helsinki, that he was stopped about 11:19 a.m. CEST on the A7 near Schleswig, or that he got legal representation by former judge Wolfgang Schomburg, won't. There is no need for a separate section to state the one single fact that's relevant to this article. And there's no need for a "current" template either. It's not the same as a war or a constitutional crisis. Scolaire (talk) 09:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I occur with this. The contribution was quite valuable in the beginning, but over time more and more irrelevant details were added, like details about his stop in Finland and the exact time of his arrest. --TheRandomIP (talk) 16:59, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ on the template, at first. It is not uncommon in Wikipedia to use it in this case: For subsections see de:Carles Puigdemont#Erneuter Haftbefehl und Festnahme in Deutschland) and for the whole article see it:Carles Puigdemont.

Second, I've a question regarding sub-articles. Are they allowed in English Wikipedia? --Nov3rd17 (talk) 18:09, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean, can you create an Arrest of Carles Puigdemont article, I can guarantee you that such an article would be immediately nominated for deletion, and would be deleted. If that's not what you mean, what do you mean by "sub-articles"? Scolaire (talk) 18:29, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it would be better if you proposed any edits you wanted to make on this talk page, when you know in advance they are likely to be controversial. Scolaire (talk) 18:34, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And also, there is major edit-warring on the German article – and a very similar discussion to this one on the talk page – and a Recentism template on the "Arrest" section in the Italian article, so experienced editors on those pages have exactly the same concerns that I do. Scolaire (talk) 18:43, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Scolaire: It proves my point, that the template "current" (or it's non-English cousins) is used in German and Italian Wikipedia. Why not use it here?

Mr Puigdemont is not in exile in Belgium anymore, it's like "0 is not 1". One can fix this by a new subsection (you don't want it) or declaring with template "current" that the article or it's structure may be outdated (you don't want it) or find another more general headline for the subsection: You don't want my solution - that still mentions Belgium (as his residence up to now) first and then Europe - on the grounds that Spain is in Europe,too? What is that? Do you think that I wanted to infer that Spain doesn't belong to Europe? That would be very "unscolaric" of you! --Nov3rd17 (talk) 19:53, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2nd: BTW I think that those who edited the English article in the past are best to decide on it's development. Not newbies (to this English article) like us.--Nov3rd17 (talk) 20:24, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1. Some person added the template on German Wikipedia. Some person added the template on Italian Wikipedia. The Wikipedias themselves did not do anything. There is disagreement on both German and Spanish Wikipedia about how the event is to be handled. Therefore, somebody adding a template on those articles is not a good argument for you adding it on English Wikipedia. You can add it on English Wikipedia if you have consensus to do so. You do not have consensus to do so.
2. The "Exile in Belgium" section is about that part of his life that began when he left Catalonia. His arrest in Germany, en route back to Belgium, is part of that. As I said back at the start, if he returns to Belgium the section heading will still be good; if he is extradited to Spain, that will be dealt with in a new section (and I'm sorry, but saying that he was exiled from Europe to Europe is ridiculous). But there is no hurry. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. It should not be updated on a daily basis according to what is in the headlines. Ideally, nothing more should be added to this article (except relevant, sourced information about his earlier life or career) for another six months until it is clear what course his life is taking. This "on 25 March (about 11:19 a.m. CEST) his car was stopped on the A7 near Schleswig and he was arrested by the Landespolizei of Schleswig-Holstein" style of writing is a disease. Let events unfold, and then summarise what reliable sources (preferably not news reports) say.

This discussion has been going for 24 hours and still nobody has posted in support of your edits. Please wait until you have a consensus before going any further.

P.S. Those who edited the English article in the past are welcome to discuss it here. So far, nobody has. The fact that I haven't edited this article before does not make me a "newbie" in any sense. Scolaire (talk) 20:30, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"11:19 a.m." was never my issue here. It was a mistake and so I didn't defend it once. But waiting six months before writing about developments is equally indefensible. Do you find even one article about a major active politician where important developments are hold back for six months? --Nov3rd17 (talk) 20:40, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't expect people to wait six months before editing. I said that ideally they would. People do add to Wikipedia articles each time they read something new, and it makes for bad articles. Look at Catalan independence referendum, 2017, for instance. It's a complete mess. If somebody was starting to write that article now, it would look completely different. All I'm saying – and I've said it twice already – is that if Puigdemont's case is thrown out and he returns to Brussels, then it will be appropriate to write another single sentence to say so; and if he is sent back to Spain, it will be appropriate to write a single sentence to say so, and also to add a new section heading. In the meantime, there is no need to keep fiddling with the article. Scolaire (talk) 09:08, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Scolaire:In French Wikipedia they have more general section names, see: fr:Carles Puigdemont:"1.5 Président de la Généralité de Catalogne" and "1.6 Après sa destitution". Without using subsections of 1.6 it would comply with a more actual structure AND a more biographical style. Is that agreeable? --Nov3rd17 (talk) 08:54, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like the structure of the French article at all. It's exactly the sort of thing I'm trying to avoid here. I don't see how "Après sa destitution" is a "more actual structure" or a better biographical style than "Exile in Belgium". I would be agreeable to just leaving the article alone. Scolaire (talk) 09:18, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's better because it is more factual. The section "Exile in Belgium" now covers all the time after his disposal as president. So the headline "after his disposal" is in line with the text of the subsection. But when the text states that he is in prison in Germany (for extradition to Spain) then he is clearly not "in exile in Belgium". It is a simple "0 is not 1" stuff.--Nov3rd17 (talk) 10:46, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not "0≠1", it's nitpicking. Take a look at 14th Dalai Lama#Exile to India. That section heading has been there since 2005. Now take a look at this page and see how many times he has been outside India since his exile. Has anybody complained on the talk page, or tried to change the heading? Never. "After his dismissal" is indefinite and vague: in a few months or a few years it might have to be changed to "After his dismissal and before his extradition back to Spain" or "After his dismissal and before his triumphant return to Catalonia". "Exile in Belgium" concisely describes the period of his life we're talking about, even if he is not physically in Belgium during the entire period.

I repeat, if somebody else agrees with you on any of your points, then you can try to establish a consensus. As of now, you have no consensus for any of your edits, so please let it go. Scolaire (talk) 11:41, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The exile of the Dalai Lama to India is well established, he effectively got asylum there. If he would be arrested in another country on foot of a warrant from China, India would protect him. But the Belgian authorities don't defend Mr Puigdemont and never did it in the past. All "Belgium" did was that an important court in Brussels was suspicious of the warrant and the Belgian prosecutor was suspicious and the Belgian federal government refrained from lauding the Spanish one. And then Spain backtracked from the European arrest warrant. With no European arrest warrant in place and being a citizen of an European country, Carles Puigdemont had the right to live in Belgium. So his "exile in Belgium" wasn't a real exile. As long as it lasted the arrest paused but now the pause is over. The odds that Mr Puigdemont will leave German prison as a free man are low, as the German federal government rushed to laud the Spanish one and the German prosecutors are "weisungsgebunden" (subject to directives), only the courts are independent. So he needs a much stronger legal defense before court. And even then it would be a big surprise if he wouldn't be extradited. --Nov3rd17 (talk) 17:29, 30 March 2018 (UTC). Source for "subject to directives" see section 146 (GVG, Courts Constitution Act, official translation from German) --Nov3rd17 (talk) 17:10, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is insufficient content to merit a separate section on Puigdemont's arrest. The fact that other wikis have separate sections is irrelevant, this article's structure has to looked at on its own. Having said that, we do need to elaborate on his arrest and detention (not enough to justify a new section) and I intend to do that when you guys have stopped edit warring and things have calmed down. The two section headings which have been changed recently should be changed to Constitutional crisis and Exile.--Obi2canibe (talk) 17:55, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No need to wait, Obi2canibe. I'm sure your edits will be sensible, and I'm sure Nov3rd17 will be fine with them. He was only fighting with me for the joy of it. Scolaire (talk) 18:33, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The German OLG ruled today that Puigdmeont cannot be extradited for the charge of rebellion but he may be extradited. Are there legal loopholes for the Spanish prosecutor to try him for additional offenses (once they have Puigdemont in Spain)? --Nov3rd17 (talk) 18:24, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]