"

But I haven't denied that at all! I am myself a subject who considers himself both french and spaniard... with both breton and Asturian  roots... So what? Of course there are roussillonese who may consider themselves catalan without stopping feeling french... I'm just saying that there are no references of studies or scholars (apart that GREC article) to back the sentence in the lead of the article: ""Other Catalan-speaking people from the Pays Catalan in southern France, Andorrans or Valencians are sometimes included in a Catalan ethnic group"". That sentence is so freely included in wikipedia is just doesn't fit. We could also said that 3/4 of the spaniards may ""also be included in a Almoravid ethnic root""... I'm sorry, but that is just too POVish.

Let me copy/paste here the first paragraphs of the ""Explanation of the neutral point of view section"" in Wikipedia:Neutral point of view:

""The neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting verifiable perspectives on a topic as evidenced by reliable sources. The policy requires that where multiple or conflicting perspectives exist within a topic each should be presented fairly. None of the views should be given undue weight or asserted as being judged as ""the truth"", in order that the various significant published viewpoints are made accessible to the reader, not just the most popular one. It should also not be asserted that the most popular view, or some sort of intermediate view among the different views, is the correct one to the extent that other views are mentioned only pejoratively. Readers should be allowed to form their own opinions.""

""The neutral point of view is neither sympathetic nor in opposition to its subject: it neither endorses nor discourages viewpoints. As the name suggests, the neutral point of view is a point of view, not the absence or elimination of viewpoints. The elimination of article content cannot be justified under this policy on the grounds that it is ""POV"". Article content should clearly describe, represent, and characterize disputes within topics, but without endorsement of any particular point of view. Articles should provide background on who believes what and why, and which view is more popular; detailed articles might also contain evaluations of each viewpoint, but must studiously refrain from taking sides.""

So, this said, again, I'm not against including that some sources claim the other regions to have some degree of Catalanity, but, as the guideline states ""Articles should provide background on who believes what and why"". So, my addition that is only the GREC who includes all territories as catalan is correct and, even, necessary in order to let ""Readers [...] to form their own opinions"". The same way the article should include sources to back that some people consider all territories as catalan, it should also include sources that some others don't.

Do we agree on this? MauritiusXXVII (Aut Disce, Aut Doce, Aut Discede!). "