Talk:History of Spain (1975–present)

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Spain High‑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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. European history This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The article would benefit from a complete rewriting. It seems to be put together by someone with a secondary school level of English as a foreign language Asterion 00:16, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is a mistake... Zapatero is not supported by CC, only by ERC and IU, although CC is not against, we shouldn't say that they are helping him. Also, as recent news, we could speak about the aptitude of ERC with the Statut of Catalonia, that could result in breaking relations between PSOE and ERC and letting CiU the gate to negotiate with PSOE.

It's fairly misleading to imply that the Madrid bombings were the only causal factor in Zapatero's win in the 2004 elections (and also a bit weasley). This article makes it sound as if the PP was almost sure of winning prior to March 11, and that the bombings changed everyone's mind. Give the Spanish people more credit than that.

Well, actually the PP was almost sure of winning prior to March 11. Some people say they were even going to have the majority to rule without needing a coalition. I wouldn't go that far, but I remember that spanish TV station Tele5 predicted a victory of the PP in the evening of March 14, because they had done a poll during Tuesday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday; the usual way is to do it in the day the elections are held. People didn't change their vote from the PP to the PSOE; what happened was that a lot of people who originally planned to abstent, then decided to punish the PP for doing what they saw as manipulation of the facts. A couple of months after the elections, a poll showed 20% of people saying that they changed their mind after the bombings, though I haven't a source for this...

We should stick with using History of...(year - year), as with

• Neutrality — Scholars disagree on when "Modern Spain" began and ended:
  • Raymond Carr's Modern Spain begins in 1875 and ends in 1980.
  • Richard Herr's An Historical Essay on Modern Spain kicks off in the 1960s.
  • Jon Cowans' Early Modern Spain: A Documentary History sets the starting date in the mid-15th century.
• Conformity is important for Wikipedia's ease of use.
• Clarity — it is not clear from "Modern Spain" that this is a history article. It could very well be a piece on Spanish art, architecture, you name it.

Right, I'm gonna

• I agree... this article needs almost a complete rewrite. --Francisco Valverde 12:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've started cleaning up the grammar and writing style, which is very poor. I would appreciate it if someone could also do a little background check, since a lot of the assertions (e.g. the King's interview with Newsweek) could use some backing up and referencing just for completeness' sake, and there are a lot of sentences which don't introduce the reader to what's going on - namedropping like that Arias in the first section implies (wait for it) that the writer assumes that the reader must know who Arias is. —The preceding

Not a word about Spain withdrawing their troops from Iraq as a consequence? On 18 April, 2004 "Spain's new prime minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero has given orders for Spanish troops in Iraq to be brought home in "as short a time as possible". (BBC) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3637523.stm and stating so already in March: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3518826.stm Nunamiut (talk) 18:58, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of Spain (1975–present). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928022020/http://nick.frejol.org/democracy-and-after/ to http://nick.frejol.org/democracy-and-after/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:00, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

it sucks 140.232.177.180 (talk) 01:41, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

edit on the other hand actually i do appreciate the explanation of context in a lot of these things. Im here for a project. But giving some explanation as to more minor details is actually pretty interesting and super helpful for enhancing my comprehensive understanding, assuming its true, but the way it is written is still very not-wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.177.180 (talk) 01:43, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]