Talk:Elche

This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Spain 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Catalan-speaking countries Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catalan-speaking countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history, languages, and cultures of Catalan-speaking countries 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.Catalan-speaking countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Catalan-speaking countriesTemplate:WikiProject Catalan-speaking countriesCatalan-speaking countries Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Cities This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

This article contains a translation of Elche from es.wikipedia.

Why was the World Heritage section removed? --Error 00:58, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I added a link pointing to "A Handful of Spanish Towns" It's a travel story connecting Elche, Orihuela, Murcia, Cartagena and Alicante.

Scribbleman 08:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please wait for a response on this talkpage when you announce your intentions to include these Terje Raa travel stories. Don’t include them yourself, as including these links are your only contributions here, you seem to have a conflict of interest. Please wait for community input, thanks. --Van helsing 12:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The slash form Elx/Elche is a new term invented by compromising and rather lazy latter-day bureaucrats. In English "Elx/Elche" (or "Elche/Elx", doesnt matter) is not a proper noun at all, but a new and totally different constructed noun resulting from the combination of two nouns in two different languages, neither of which are spoken in an English speaking country. It should be determined which one is most used in English, either Elche or Elx instead, but Elx/Elche does not exist in English and it is not the way the English language works, regardless whatever Spaniards do, think or compromise with. English can take some credit in not assuming schizoid Spanish toponimy quirks and the English version of wikipedia should not mimic those. Just think of the massive implications that would have all over wikipedia with so many co-official terms all around the world for cities which have little record in English press. That is some point to be taken into account.

As for which term is most used in English, that is likely to be Elche. According to google searches, for example, "Elx is located" gives some 43,300 impacts [1] while "Elche is located" gives some 184,000 impacts [2] that is more than four times "Elx..".

What is important is that we dont swallow extremly odd terms regardless whatever "officiality" they may have in a country where English is not the language of the land. Elx/Elche may make sense in Spain (if you think it over, not really that much, but they rather just got accustomed...but that is another story). In any case, it certainly does not make any sense in English.

This said, I am not opposed to using both terms interchangeably all over the main text, but at least the title should be uniformized. Mountolive _{spare me the suspense} 14:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I 100% agree that it should not be a slashed name, as it is not the name or naming convention of wikipedia. I checked 6 reliable English language references (3 encyclopedias and 3 dictionaries), and they all give the Elche spelling as the main entry:

Encyclopedias: MSN Encarta [3], Columbia Encyclopedia [4], and Encyclopaedia Britannica [5]

Dictionaries: American Heritage [6], Merriam-Webster [7], Random House [8]

I prospose we change the title to just Elche. Kman543210 (talk) 11:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Time ago, after an invading war, Castille imposed its language to the valencian country. People still talk catalan, but the Spanish government made its own list of Spanish names, and it has been used by several encyclopedias or sources, english people who just copy, but has never been in Elx. It is because they have used a spanish source of information. Yeah, let's continue like that and let's kill the mother tongue of the wonderful Elx town. Google is not fair play, most of the names can be imposed, either knowing or not knowing the reality. I'm for Elx. 43,000 impacts is more than important, 43,000 that english people has not just copied, has been informed.--Ssola (talk) 17:22, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just for expanding your kinda sketchy historical knowledge, a rather small number of Castilian troops invaded a Moor taifa which had become basically a no man's land in the turbulent context of the final years of the 13th century. So Castile was the first Christian kingdom to set a foot in Alicante. Then, after yet another "invading war", Aragonese troops finally came to put order in the area. And this city appears consistently in most contemporary Catalan documents as Elig. Elx is something someone came up with in the second half of the 20th century based on some scholarly ortography reform. Just for your information. MOUNTOLIVE _{fedeli alla linea} 15:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Population Density in the Infobox is wrong. How is it correctable? Regards -- Sweepy (talk) 17:10, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elche. 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/20110202011700/http://www.iloveelche.com/ to http://www.iloveelche.com/

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. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 05:46, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Municipalities, where a similar quantity of inhabitants that are not capital of a province, such as Gijón, Terrassa, Sabadell and Móstoles are assessed as mid importance at least in the project.

--Yolanda95 (talk) 16:51, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Yolanda95[reply]

Recently a protracted edit war broke out over the Template:Weather box in the Climate section. The past version of this article cited weather modelling data from meteoblue.com, a site which archives weather models and observations.

An editor has repeatedly insisted on replacing the climate averages with data from climate-data.org and/or various other sources, based on claims that the averages from Meteoblue's models are inaccurate. Another editor has repeatedly reverted these changes to reflect the status quo. Discussion of these changes occured entirely through edit summaries, quickly became uncivil and seemingly unproductive.

From my observations, Meteoblue seems to be the most readily verifiable source for these averages, and I believe the weatherbox should continue to cite it unless a new consensus emerges from discussion. These are averages, liable to fluctuate significantly across years and measurements, and minor numeric variations or disagreements between sources don't suggest that the data is false or misleading. RoxySaunders (talk) 05:06, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RoxySaunders: Hello Roxy, exactly, I also vote to keep Meteoblue's data as it's more representative of Elche. I know well the climate of my city and which data is closer or not. Yes, that data has been here for years until he changed it with climate-data.org which is always criticized in all weather websites for being the least reliable page. That "source" should be only used as a last option and this is not the case. But that's not the point. I think his main problem was with Elche having 17° in January for example, but it's 16° not 17 as someone upgraded it with 1° and I corrected all of the data already.

Meteoblue is more accurate to show the reality of the city's climate, Elche has hotter summers than coastal Alicante because it's in the interior in a valley. It also has slightly cooler night temps but warmer daytime temps from March to October, this is found in most of the climates of the Iberian Peninsula. Maybe Meteoblue is wrong for other places, but for Elche they definetly come close to reality. And they have much more extended information than any other similar website.

I have added a source that explains the climate of Elche is BWh hot desertic, from 2003-2015 the city averaged more than 19° and the data comes from the official agricultural station of Generalitat Valenciana and meteoelche so an annual average of 18.5 is quite more accurate and closer to reality as I have explained, everything is written in the source. The city has also a BWh hot arid climate and definetly not a BSk climate. The studies from the university prove this fact. ^[1]

Universidad Miguel Hernández made an extensive research about the climate of Elche and I have posted the link, the other source he posted is based on flora found in Elche and that "1981-2010 city hall" data is obviously false because 1. Elche doesn't have any long term weather station and less the city hall which uses meteoelche.com data (website started in 2008) and 2. The averages and even more the extremes are obviously invented, there isn't any 1981-2010 data and in that period of time, the coldest temperature Elche got was in January 2005 with -2.5° and there are sites having that info. The student that made the other work most probably used the Spanish Wikipedia data (which is unreferenced/unsourced) as for being an extensive 300 page work, the climate is only mentioned once. Isn't that suspicious? That's a flora intended work, I suggest "Joe" to read the university work I have added which talks exclusively about the climate of Elche.

I don't know why someone from Portugal is obsessed with the climate of my city which I know about, I have added an University of Elche (UMH) source and he still reverted my changes, like if a study from an university is a bad reference or something. It was neither needed to insult me twice calling me "dumb" or "nuts" and he shouldn't talk bad with me in the edit summaries like if I was inferior for not being a registered user. I just suggest Average Portuguese Joe to keep on editing places he knows about as for Elche he obviously doesn't live here to know anything about our climate or our studies. I also suggest to be more kind and gentle with people as Wikipedia is not a website to insult anyone for making some simple edits in a page, this is not a life situation. Now with everything explained, I hope this user will read and comprehend. --31.4.227.63 (talk) 12:40, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please listen to what is said in this text carefully. I've made over 1000 edits on climate related articles so I know what I'm talking about. Also I don't think RoxySaunders understood what is really my point. I'm not promoting climate-data, I'm promoting the official 1981-2010 averages.

Part 1: Why is meteoblue not the best source. It's easily observed that the averages cited on meteoblue are far from true, want me to compare? let me give you some examples: Alicante [9], Lisbon [10], Valencia [11], seing this examples, its obvious these are not very accurate nor specific to a location, rather a large, very large area, how do I know? take a look at Sagres [12] or Peniche [13], the only 29°C place is somewere closer to Santarém which is somewhere at least 50km inland. And please, don't tell me this is just for these places. How do you now the same doesn't apply in Elche when it clearly applies to the nearest station? I only put climate-data because it's more precise than that errouneous model, until I found the official averages.

Part 2: Why even if these were closer than to the official ones, they still should not be used. Ever heard of a Climatological normal? You can see them in all Wikipedia articles about a city. You can tell me "Well, but isn't it warmer now in some of these cities?" Yes, it is warmer now than those 1981-2010 or this year's 1991-2020 averages, but a period of 30 years is the minimum telltale sign of a change in climate. A 10 year average is not enough to characterize the climate. Yes, Elche probably has an average >18°C and can be classified as "hot" in this day. But not on what were the latest 1981-2010 averages. "The city has also a BWh hot arid climate and definetly not a BSk climate. The studies from the university prove this fact" well that just proves my point, maybe because these "averages" were recorded (if this is the same study) a mere 13 years, which for climatology, is a joke.

Part 3: The user persists telling me these 1981-2010 averages are fake, almost like a Donald Trump "Fake news", but he still uses a modeled website to present the averages. Wikipedia does not work like that. These 1981-2010 values were recorded on the city, yours are a calculus. Let me give you an example: Lugar de Baixo is one of Madeira's warmest spots, but the only available official source is from 1961-1990, do you really think that's up to date? Of course not. But it is not a lie. The reader can make up what ever he wants in his mind, but the facts are written in there and is all we officially know about the averages, 1961-1990. A user like you would think, "well it is certainly warmer than that now", while other reader could think it is still up to date. The fact is, we don't know how the climate is in 1991-2020 because we don't have those averages. Same applies to here. You don't even have those 2003-2015 averages you are talking about so why persist? And who do you think I'm going to trust? Studies or doctoral thesis that explain the 1981-2010 averages in detail, and regard them as official; or an IP account which doesn't have any average even close to official status, uses a non-specific climate model and doesn't have any source (better say good source) that proves on paper these 1981-2010 averages are fake?

Bottomline: I propose to keep the 1981-2010 averages, and if this user has the 1991-2020 averages or at least his 2003-2015 averages, than he should put them (if he has the 2003-2015 averages, both should be on the article). But replacing official averages with a "climate model" is not accepted. I also propose any editor with basic knowledge on climatology to evaluate this discussion because if this is only restricted to me and this IP, were going to be here all day. Average Portuguese Joe (talk) 14:59, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: It is also worth noting this user, until this edit-war started, put winter averages higher then they were on Meteoblue [14] which is just an abuse, completely disruptive and non-wikipedia like. This user is also trying to do the same with the article in Spanish, a good article, and his editions are constantly being reverted by others users, for obvious reasons.

@Average Portuguese Joe: dude no offence but we're both dumb, it was in front of our eyes all of this time and we didn't even realize that Elche Airport has an official AEMET station with 1981-2010 averages and 1967-2020 extremes. Yet we are arguing about much less useful sources. But let me tell you something first, that guy from the PDF literally made a climate page saying "1981-2020 city hall normals" taking the data off the Spanish Wikipedia, that data has been there for years inserted by someone that invented all of that data as it was unsourced all of this time. There are 0 stations hosted by the city hall and they take the data from meteoelche which exists since 2008.

And no, why do you blame me if I have said it before you when I first replied to Roxy? I've edited the real temps from Meteoblue as someone else inserted slightly upgraded temps 1 month ago, as you can see I have modified the data with the real ones, just as 16 in January instead of 17 but you didn't noticed my changes. The Spanish Wikipedia has this unsourced false data and I am doing the same changes there, yes, but that's unrelated to the English Wikipedia. I have been reverted and I undo and started a new section in the talk page to explain the same as here. Wikipedia needs sources/references for data, you at least changed it to climate-data but in the Spanish Wikipedia it hasn't got any single source.

But it doesn't matter, this has been solved since we do have official data from the airport. Could you please do a weather box out of this data? I don't know exactly how to create one from zero. Averages: http://www.aemet.es/es/serviciosclimaticos/datosclimatologicos/valoresclimatologicos?l=8019&k=undefined and Extremes: http://www.aemet.es/es/serviciosclimaticos/datosclimatologicos/efemerides_extremos*?w=0&k=val&l=8019&datos=det&x=8019&m=13&v=todos this is the Elche-Alicante airport that's inside of Elche's urban area. This is much more useful than any kind of website and we can end this discussion. That 2003-2015 data is warmer and it's inside in the city of Elche yet it's not an official station, this one is from AEMET and it has the 1981-2010 standard averages. Could you please make the chart so we can end this argument? --31.4.227.63 (talk) 15:52, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@31.4.227.63: I know there are averages for the airport, i corrected Alicante's climate because they were using mixed values from those normals, but there is this stigma in climate editors that data from airports that far should not be used, (ex. Barcelona), the airport is on the coast while Elche is 12km inland, clearly with a different climate.

I think you are mixing things, the normals on the pdf were not taken from Wikipedia, do you know how bad it would be for a doctoral thesis to have something out of wikipedia? That alone could make you loose your degree. These averages were not "invented", there are a lot of other studies regarding these same averages.

I still propose to use these 1981-2010 averages and if you want you could use those from AEMET of the airport too, but that alone does not represent the climate of the city. Average Portuguese Joe (talk) 16:11, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Average Portuguese Joe: Yes, that data is obviously taken off the Spanish Wikipedia and it doesn't appear in any other website, did you contact the city hall of Elche to ask them if they have a running weather station or even better, one with 1981-2010 averages? Do it and you'll see by yourself. It's obviously invented data and also completely unreal, in 1981-2010 the coldest temperature Elche had is -2.5° in 2005 yet that data shows -7° so when was that? It's so unreal that's not more than a bad joke. Do you know Elche is famous for it's century-old palm trees and oranges? These temps would have barren them all. You won't find any single source with these false averages unless the ones that took them from the Spanish Wikipedia.

Now that's over, why you don't insert Elche's airport values and it's over? Do you argue for a few kilometers? Do you know why it's called Alicante-Elche airport? It's called Alicante-Elche because it was built to serve Alicante yet it's inside of Elche's urban and municipal area, it's at just 7km from the outskirts of the city at the same altitude and geographical area. 12km maybe from Elche's center to the airport entrance, yet the weather station from the airport is more inland, close to a town called Torrellano. The station is at just 7km from Elche's city outskirts. So why don't we stop the drama and we insert the official airport averages? Elche is at a very low altitude in a depression between valleys, it's in fact even warmer than the airport because of the hotter summers. It's not clearly a different climate, but I'm reasonable and I say to put the official Elche Airport data.

After looking at the obviously invented extremes, the averages have also leaks, as Elche definetly doesn't have 15° in January for example, but more 16-17 like the official data from the airport shows. I can link you off data from meteoelche or inforatge showing you various of the stations they have inside Elche and all average in January around 17° also with warmer lows, 5° is not realistic. Just check meteoelche.com which is the reference for the city hall for example. I know the climate of my city, and I'm even being reasonable with you, you wanted official data, here you have it. Elche-Alicante airport that is, I'm not even asking you to put meteolche data which is warmer. This is official AEMET data, the most useful. You've said you edit weather articles, can you make that weather box as I don't know how? So we can end this. --31.4.227.63 (talk) 16:53, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First of all you still haven't proven those averages are fake, -7°C is very much possible because the lowest recorded at the airport, relatively close to the coast, was -3.8°C; but still, I will put the airport averages. Average Portuguese Joe (talk) 19:18, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Average Portuguese Joe: I don't have a major proof but I am 100% sure they are simply because that data was taken off Wikipedia, I have contacted the city hall of Elche in December 2020 and they have obviously 0 stations, all I got was a reply to contact Generalitat Valenciana or Meteoelche, the latter having 2008-2020 on their website. Take account that the -3.8° mark from the airport didn't happen in 1981-2010 and the day Elche had -2.5° the airport had -2.6° which is even 0.1° less than Elche, that was on the morning of 31 December 2005. I am telling you but not only this city but all of the area of southern Alicante is in a depression with warm temps, if you see the AEMET map all areas are above the 17.5° average threshold (except for few mountainous areas) and the climates shown are BSh and even BWh, with a bit of the subarid k colder climates in the areas above 200m but Elche is almost akin to the airport with slightly warmer daytime temps, the station of the airport is bordering Torrellano, a town near Elche, which is more inland. In the Spanish Wikipedia they have also added the airport values and deleted everything else, I'm glad we reached a mutual opinion. --31.4.227.63 (talk) 21:07, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]