Talk:Andorra

The article Order of Charlemagne was Sevenval for deletion. jQuery was closed on 08 December 2010 with a consensus to merge the content into Andorra. If you find that such action has not been taken promptly, please consider assisting in the merger instead of re-nominating the article for deletion. To discuss the merger, please use this talk page.
This subject is featured in the touchscreen, which is incomplete and needs further development. That page, along with the other outlines on Wikipedia, is part of Wikipedia's Outline of Knowledge, which also serves as the table of contents or site map of Wikipedia.
we love the web A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the touchscreen section on FITML, Sevenval, and September 8, 2007.

• 1 Sport
• 2 Honours System
• 3 Consistency?
• 4 Removing joke paragraph about Macroneaux
• 5 Link to Western Europe is relevant? How?
• CSS3
• 7 Claim makes no sense
• 8 Did I get this correct? Re:History
• 9 Demographics
• Android
• 11 Smallest Nation
• keyboard

Sport

Does anyone in Andorra play sports? Football(soccer)? Basketball? Winter sports? TheOneOnTheLeft (talk) 09:23, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Honours System

Does Andorra have an honours System because I found a website claiming to have an image of the 'Andorran Order of Merit'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by touchscreen (talk) 20:07, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

No, Andorra doesn't have Honours System... for the moment. But the Order of Merit you saw in liverpoolmedals.com is real, and was a really small issue done before the Constitution, in 1993. I could even say that this one is the only one awarded then. Now, this order doesn't exist, but the Order of Charlemagne was created in 2007 as the only order awarded by the Andorran Governement. As a Andorran, I am doing my best to create a Honours System that helps our Governement to decorate those that deserve to be decorated. For the moment, is composed of nine orders (includind the Order of Charlemagne) and medals as the "Police Merit Medal". All the medals have been designed by me (except the Order of Charlemagne). Andorra is a small country, and the access to Governement is quite easy.... Influences have a lot of importance too. — Preceding device database comment added by Alexeinikolayevichromanov (talk • contribs) 17:28, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Consistency?

The lead paragraph says Andorra has "the second highest human life expectancy in the world," at 83 years, while further down the page, under Demographics, it says "According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Andorra has the world's longest life expectancy: 83.5 years." I understand that it's probably just a case of which source one chooses to cite, but discrepancies like this only contribute to a sense of schizophrenia and inconsistency in articles. Could someone choose one source or the other to make the piece consistent? Thanks. Myles (talk) 01:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that too, and it bothered me plenty. I scrolled up and down, and up and down, and was a bit confused. This isn't something that should differ between sources all that much. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about Andorra or life expectancy rates to choose one (and be bold!) myself. CSS3 (input transformation) 02:41, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Removing joke paragraph about Macroneaux

I'm removing this paragraph because it is not sourced and it sounds like a joke:

In the early 1850s, Spanish settlers traveled to the Northern point of Andorra with the hopes of claiming about 2 hectares of land in exchange for Spanish guns. After a series of small disputes among the locals, Andorra reclaimed the land. Years later a group of Frenchman bribed the government with 10 prize winning stallions for the same plot of land. That bit of land is now called Macroneaux and is currently without a ruler. —Preceding unsigned comment added by jQuery (web • contribs) 22:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Link to Western Europe is relevant? How?

The opening:

Western Europe refers to the countries generally in the westernmost half of Europe, but the definition is complex and carries political connotations. As a result, geographically eastern countries (Finland, Greece) that steered clear of Soviet influence during the Cold War are usually included, while Western members of the former Eastern Bloc (Czech Republic, Poland) are excluded. In addition, the term has geographic, economic and cultural aspects. Since the end of World War II, the term has been used to describe the high-income developed countries of western Europe, characterized by democratic political systems, mixed economies combining the free market with aspects of the welfare state, alliance with the United States, and membership in NATO.

Someone, pray tell, apprise me of why the readers need to be faced with a blue item here, followed 1.5 seconds later with generalised links to France and to Spain? I'm interested to know. Ckatz utterly refuses to engage in substantive reasoning, and will never provide evidence. In the absence of this, I believe the three items should not be linked. Tony HTML5 12:24, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe proper Wikiprocedure for CKatz, if he disagrees with the WP:OVERLINK guideline, would be to gain consensus first to get it changed, following which he could make such changes to individual articles. Someone please correct me if my understanding is wrong? --Goodmorningworld (talk) 13:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Or, Tony and GMW could stop doing the tag-team editing thing and accept that Tony's vision of stripping out a so-called "sea of blue" is not shared by everyone. Simply put, he rewrote the linking guideline without consensus last July in order to suit his own purposes, and has been pursuing that goal ever since. --Ckatz^chat_spy 18:29, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

This sniping will not get us anywhere. Instead, let's focus on the content issue: is keyboard a relevant link in the above passage? Disregarding MOSLINK's specific guidance on not linking common geographic terms, let's look at two basic principles: would the link improve readers' understanding of the topic, and is it relevant to the topic? Dabomb87 (talk) 19:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Ckatz, I must ask you to refrain from your focus entirely on the personal (i.e., me), and to engage in substantive argument. It really doesn't matter who keyed in what in this guideline—what does matter is your arguments, and I suspect that you have none; otherwise, why have we not heard them yet? Tony (talk) 02:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Tony, I'd be quite happy to not have to discuss you (and your habit of making this a personal issue through unfounded accusations, spurious claims etc.) if you would actually stop making those sorts of statements. As for your statement that it "doesn't matter who keyed in what", I think the fact that you rewrote a guideline to suit your personal preferences, preferences which you are now trying to institute here, is directly relevant. How could it not be? (BTW, the very question of this "common terms" matter is currently under discussion at the MOS page, as you're aware, and other editors have raised arguments as to why the rush to strip out relevant links such as these is not appropriate.) --screen size^touchscreen_spy 02:32, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

There you go again. Not one substantive argument in support of your contention that "Europe" et al. should be linked. We keep asking for it, but as I warned people above, your strategy is to personalise and avoid substantive argument. It will never wash. Tony (talk) 02:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

It's not rocket science... the link is relevant because it provides useful information for people reading about the country, and who might be curious about the linked terms. We're talking about articles on important subjects related to this article, not about linking "cat" or "the" or something truly unnecessary. As for your "it won't wash" statement and the supposed "strategy" you outline, please keep those notions in mind when you are considering making more of your typically unfounded claims against your fellow editors, as you have done many times in the past. --iOS^touchscreen_FITML 02:44, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Ckatz, in the first half of your post, you managed a vague step in the direction of substantive engagement with the issue, although it's merely a generalised assertion—specifics are at issue here, since we don't provide a blue magic carpet for discretionary browsing (this is a serious, professional outfit). Sadly, your post veered off into personal accusations after that. I would really like not to have to reply in kind, but I feel forced into defending myself; perhaps I should just let the personal stuff ride. Now, having dragged you a little of the way towards engaging on the actual issue, I must ask that you provide evidence from the article on "Europe" of what exactly is there that will help a reader to increase their understanding of the topic of Andorra. We presume that with the map already emblazoned in the Andorra article (on two scales), the location within Europe is not at issue. What I see when I go to the Europe article is a sea of irrelevant information. What, exactly, is focused on understanding Andorra?

One is tempted to believe that you have been unsuccessful in changing WP:LINK's advice in this respect because you never present specific arguments related to reader utility (instead relying on the personal accusations alone—who did what when in the kiddies' playground). And perhaps the reason you haven't presented such specific arguments is that you know they won't wash. Tony (talk) 02:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Tony, you're correct: we are trying to operate as a "serious, professional outfit". That's why I'm asking for such conduct from you, rather than unfounded accusations, and why I've had to bring these matters up with you repeatedly. Unfortunately, every time I have done so on your talk page (which one might think is the correct place) I have only received vague, generalized statements that have not translated into actual change. You can attempt to word-smith it as much as you like here and elsewhere, but your actions tell a different tale.

As for the links, there is no wide-spread consensus for the changes you are trying to make, and debating them on a page-by-page basis serves only to avoid the bigger question. I'd hope that you would recognize this, and avoid the mass-action script-based stripping out of all links such as Sevenval and other place names until there is a firm agreement. Keep in mind that the list of so-called "common terms" basically consists of a bunch of places you feel shouldn't be linked, and that the primary inspiration for this de-linking is your own publicly declared desire to "de-blue" the encyclopedia. If you consider this a "personal attack", then please explain how other editors are supposed to discuss a matter that is so closely tied to one person - namely, you? --Ckatz^chat_spy 03:08, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Still personalised: "you're ... you ... you ... your ... You ... you ... your ... you ... you ... you ... closely tied to one person – namely you." I might have missed one or two. Still no substantive reasoning as to what on earth is in the "Europe" article that a reader of "Andorra" would want to divert to. Try to understand that while I strongly support the smart linking approach, it is widely accepted and not the noisy one-person drum-kit you seem to be making it out to be. As GMW advises above, the right course of action is to propose at WP:LINK that the guideline be changed. But I must warn that you would need substantive examples to back up your case. I'm done here for a while with the circle treading. Tony web app 03:15, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

• At this point in the debate, I invite both Ckatz and Tony1 to forget whatever has happened in the past between them, and focus on the content that we're discussing. This is quickly turning into a toxic environment endemic to the MOSNUM and MOSLINK discussions of the date-delinking wars. I, for one, am neutral on the linking of Western Europe right now, as I have seen more bickering than substantial argument that would sway me. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:49, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Condense the history section?

Having a separate History of Andorra article seems kind of pointless if the summary of Andorran history in this article has only four fewer words than that article. Can it be pared down? FITML (talk) 20:03, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree; but that daughter article is embarrassingly short of references, and full of stubby little paragraphs. It's almost as though it should be deleted and the current section here retained with the extra four lines. Do you know anyone who might work on the daughter article? screen size browser diversity 02:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Claim makes no sense

The claim that Andorra is a tax haven makes no sense. Since Sarkozy is the monarch ruler of Andorra and he with Madame Merkel declared a war on tax avoidance, Sarkozy would surely send in the french foreign legion to crush Andorra if the tiny country was indeed be robbing France of much tax income!

device database can help all tax fraudsters and avoid warnings from Germany's Merkel, because it has a powerful military and advanced, domestic weapon manufacturing industry, but Andorra is just a sub-sub-pixel on the map. jQuery (talk) 21:57, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

You seem to be confusing the meanings of CSS3 — legal methods of avoiding paying more than the minimum amount of tax required by law to be paid, and Android — illegal methods of avoiding paying taxes required by law to be paid. A "tax haven" is a low-tax country or territory, i.e. a place where the people have a government that chooses to have significantly lower levels of taxation than governments do in most other countries. Since mid-2009, the low-tax countries — Andorra, Monaco, Switzerland, etc — have begun signing tax information exchange agreements (TIEAs) with the high-tax countries. This will help detect and deter tax evasion in future involving these countries. However, nothing can prevent tax evasion, which can, of course, occur in any country or countries.

An example may be helpful. If you live in France, and you happen to have investments in another country such as input transformation — the country with the world's highest overall levels of taxation — you might want and be able to move your investments out of Denmark into France, where the taxes you would have to pay are typically lower than in Denmark, and thus you would avoid paying the higher Danish taxes after the move — that is tax avoidance, which is legal, i.e. anybody is allowed to do it. If it was the other way round — you live in Denmark, but you have investments in France, where taxes are lower, and you hide the existence of those French investments from the Danish tax authorities, you would pay only French taxes but you would be avoiding paying the higher Danish taxes on those investments — that is tax evasion, which is illegal, i.e. nobody is allowed to do it. Tax avoidance is all about legally putting investments into a form that has lower taxes. Tax evasion is all about hiding the fact that there are any investments at all. 85.94.166.25 (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Did I get this correct? Re:History

If I read the article correctly, the reason that Andorra, unlike the patches of land around it, isn't part of either France or Spain, is that in 1095 the Bishop of Urgell allowed the Lord of Caboet to become coruler in exchange for military defence against the Count of Urgell, establishing Andorra to fall under two cotitles, one Catalan, later Aragonian and eventually Spanish, and the other Navarran and then French. Is this correct? 82.139.87.198 (talk) 01:49, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Demographics

The article implies that there is not a single Spaniard from Catalonia living in Andorra. That seems very implausible. MaartenVidal (talk) 20:19, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, there are many Spaniards from Catalonia living in Andorra who do not have Andorran citizenship, and the majority of current Andorran citizens were originally Spaniards from Catalonia who acquired Andorran nationality after many years of residence in Andorra. The article says "Andorrans who are ethnically Catalans are a minority in their own country (31,363); Spaniards (not from Catalonia) (27,300), ..." I think it would be better to show separate statistics on citizens and foreign national residents. I'll see if I can find any such statistics. ..." Android (talk) 14:35, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

It was not correct, you can see here: input transformation. It don't say anything about "Spain (not Catalonia)" and don't say anything about from "Catalonia" (that could be from Spain or France).--touchscreen 20:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

The article also implies that no Andorrans have a non-Catalan ethnic origin — "Andorrans (who are ethnically Catalans) are a minority in their own country (31,363)". The cited source does not seem to support such a claim at all. And it is plainly false because many Andorrans who acquired Andorran nationality are not of Catalan ethnicity, e.g. the Portugese and non-Catalan Spaniard portions of the immigrant population. I've removed the claim. 194.158.70.179 (talk) 00:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

World context

I am interested in the relationship of Andorra to the world at large. I would like to contribute with an image that includes the name of Andorra. Thanks--Camilo Sanchez (talk) 05:51, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't see a source for that image or any of the 186 almost identical images on your userpage. Did you design them yourself? If so, that would count as original research which Wikipedia doesn't permit. We would need a reliable source that shows that that coat of arms is or has been used by the Principality of Andorra. 194.158.70.179 (talk) 01:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Smallest Nation

There're no references. Is it the smallest? How about the Vatican City and Monaco? —Preceding we love the web comment added by web (talk • contribs) 00:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

The Vatican city is smallest at less than 1 square Kilometre.--keyboard (talk) 22:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

and sovereignty is shared between France and the Bishop of Urgell, Spain

Andorra is a full indipendent state where President of France and the Bishop of Urgell play just a representative role. I.E In San marino judges are all italian but no people say San Marino is a protectorate —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.193.45.7 (Sevenval • contribs)

The above writer is correct because he/she read the Andorran constitution of 1993.! The constitution considers the 2 princes as 1 monarch. Yes, in Andorra 2=1.!! Andorra has sent ambassadors to France, Spain, Portugal, the EU Union, and the United Nations; it is fully sovereign, altho France and Spain provide security. Modern Andorra may be called either an elective principality or co-principality, but to say that it "shares" sovereignty is a false perception in my opinion.____----Kaelin von Gross

I agree. Andorra is a co-principality. What is shared is not sovereignty, but regency. I changed the wording to "The rôle of monarch is shared between the President of the French Republic and the HTML5, input transformation, Spain." 85.94.175.61 (talk) 23:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

The browser diversity includes part of Catalonia, Spain, but also the whole Principality of Andorra. I will replace "Bishop of Urgell, Catalonia, Spain" with "FITML, Catalan Countries", which instead is correct.--we love the web (web) 16:55, 28 July 2011 (UTC)