Talk:Ceuta

IPA Pronunciation

In Britain, the pronunciation is with a yod UK: /ˈsjuːtə/. In the United States, the pronunciation is yod-dropping US: /ˈseɪuːtə/. Also, anyone who is a native speaker of English from the United States, Britain, Canada or Australia, your inputs are welcome.

Here are phonetic archives dating from the 1940s with link: 6th Edition of An English Pronouncing Dictionary page 103 - https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.94053/page/n103

Also, check the 3rd edition of Longman Pronunciation Dictionary & 18th edition of Cambridge English Pronouncing Dictionaries for phonetics & pronunciations.

I based pronunciations on observations & obviously common on both sides of the pond. Also, websites like Merrian-Webster that doesn't use IPA & Oxford Dictionaries with World English has so many flaws & inconsistencies.

You have to know the rules of phonetics, take into account the pronunciation of native speakers & not base everything on a book or website.

You need to read this page, this is the reason why I'm editing the phonetics for conciseness: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/English

NKM1974 (talk) 10:17, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

@NKM1974: please change the sources in the article then, because the ones we have now don’t match the IPA. イヴァンスクルージ九十八_（会話） 11:24, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Never mind, I added your IPA myself, along with the already present one. イヴァンスクルージ九十八_（会話） 11:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

• OP needs to explain what he means because it's very confusing. Yod-dropping has nothing to do with this. The US pronunciation attempts a pronunciation close to the original Spanish pronunciation, while the British one has a more intuitive approach to the syllable "ceu" in English. --2001:16B8:31B9:5E00:211A:1F66:D351:CF4D (talk) 18:27, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Severe orthographic mistake

"Darija Arabic is also spoken by the 40–50% of the population who are of Moroccan origin." in the introduction means that there are people of Moroccan origin in Ceuta and that 40–50% of these speak Darija Arabic. However, in the section "Demographics", it says 48% of Ceutans are Muslim. If I understand it correctly, there aren't any other major Muslim groups, so the two percentages refer to the same people. Therefore, there should be a comma before "who", as it's a non-defining relative clause. --2001:16B8:31B9:5E00:75E9:7561:E951:20A8 (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Hospitals

I added a section on Hospitals in Ceuta. There are only a few and this seemed like the best place to put them. WP:HOS -- Talk to G Moore 11:56, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Infobox picture of Ceuta

Hello!

Yesterday, a short edit war seemed to take place in this article concerning the picture that shows up on the top of the Infobox, after an editor switched the original one for a new one. Currently, it is the new picture that stands there. Since nothing else has happened yet, I would like to know your opinions over which picture is the best, so that we can decide by consensus.

The options are:

• A: (the initial one)
• B: (the new one)

I personally prefer the initial one (A). I find it more beautiful, due to the predominance of blue and green colours, and because the angle from the hilltop provides a more encompassing view of the city. What are your opinions?

(By the way, a very similar incident took place in the article Melilla, which is why I've posted an entry similar to this one on its talk page.)

Thank you! LongLivePortugal (talk) 17:01, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

I think A is better at illustrating the topic of the article (the main purpose of the infobox image, if you ask me). Ceuta is small enough we can strive to approximate to an encompassing perspective and to give a glimpse of the geographical context of the city. Similar things can be said about Melilla, and many other cities for that matter: it's no secret that views from an elevated location (a mountain or a plane) usually offer more insight on the geography, the urban layout, et. al... In this proposal (B), while unlike Melilla's proposal, buildings at least cover a bit more than a narrow horizontal script, A actually satisfactorily illustrates the singular peninsula the city is located in (and the geographical context overall)... which makes it a no contest, IMO..--Asqueladd (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Perejil Island

The Perejil Island is administratively part of Ceuta, something that is only stated once in the article. Please fix this. Super Ψ Dro 09:10, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

That is not clear. To begin with because it is not effectively "administered" by Ceuta in any way whatsoever. The sui generis resolution of the Perejil crisis returned the rock to the statu quo, that is, for all purposes that dating back to the 1963 Barajas accords: a neutral place with no Moroccan nor Spanish presence and a moot sovereignty.--Asqueladd (talk) 09:25, 12 June 2021 (UTC).

Military

Given the importance of Ceuta for the Spanish military and the Spanish military for Ceuta (now and in history), I find strange that there is a very small mention about it. The article should deal with the military presence in the city. How many troops? What kind? --Error (talk) 09:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Plazas de Soberania

Added a mention for Plazas de soberanía about the Spanish Territories in Africa, since the Canary Islands are mentioned in the same sentence, it should fit. Keksfresser12 (talk) 00:27, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Ceuta Product Exports (2020).svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:48, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Statement in lead paragraph

… one of only a few that are permanently inhabited by a civilian population. It seems a bit unclear what precisely this means, in the context within which it's given. Could anyone elaborate on the point being made? MidnightBlue (Talk) 17:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

A point is probably being made about the Chafarinas Islands, the Peñón de Vélez de la Gomera and the Alhucemas Islands not being inhabited by a civilian population. The factoid could be removed from the lead paragraph with little loss, though.--Asqueladd (talk) 17:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

@Asqueladd: thanks for the explanation. I'd heard about small Spanish islands close to Morocco but I was unaware of their names. I'll adjust the text as you suggest. MidnightBlue (Talk) 15:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

This must be changed, against neutrality and history accuracy

"The official position of the Spanish government is that Ceuta is an integral part of Spain, and has been since the 16th century, centuries prior to Morocco's independence from Spain and France in 1956. The majority of Ceuta's population support continued Spanish sovereignty and are opposed to Moroccan control over the territory."

The text is implying that Morocco didn't exist prior to the independence from the European colonial powers, which is nonsense. Even comparing the "protectorate" status to other forms of colonisation we can doubt the use of the word independence as it wasn't legally under "occupation" even if it was de facto.

Long story short, if we are going to measure when a country starts existing by it's "independence" year, no nation existed before the 20th century creation of modern states with concrete borders and recorded jurisdiction.

Even Spain for example had in 1808 the known as Spanish War of Independence from Napoleon, and literally his brother ruled for a while. So:

- Did Spain cease existing during Napoleon's rule? No

- Did it start existing after the independence? No

In conclusion, Morocco as every other nation had lots of dynasties and rulers overtime, while historians point to the year 789 as the foundation of it by the Idrisies. The most easy way to disprove this claim, who recognised the US independence first? 86.106.2.216 (talk) 04:36, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The text is implying that Morocco didn't exist prior to the independence from the European colonial powers, which is nonsense. I cannot see how you're inferring that from the text. All it's saying is that during the centuries that Morocco was occupied, Spain treated Ceuta as separate from Morocco and integral to Spain, so giving Morocco independence didn't involve giving Ceuta to it. Largoplazo (talk) 11:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

As an American, don’t understand, but I hope that you guys all can get along 2600:1700:6DA0:D780:6036:92B3:5907:9BE0 (talk) 06:12, 5 November 2024 (UTC)