Jump to content

Talk:Italy: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
template fix
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{skiptotoctalk}}
{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header| hide_find_sources= yes}}
{{talkheader}}
{{British English}}
{{tmbox
{{Article history
| type = content
|action1=PR
| text = '''This is [[WP:NOT#FORUM|not a forum]] for general discussion of [[{{PAGENAME}}]].''' Any such messages will be deleted. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article.
|action1date=10:00:39 13 March 2012 (UTC)
|action1link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Italy/archive1
|action1result=reviewed
|action1oldid=939036454
}}
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|1=
{{VA|topic=Geography|level=3|class=B}}
{{WikiProject Italy|importance=Top}}
{{Outline of knowledge coverage|Italy}}
{{WikiProject Europe|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProjectBanners|
{{WikiProject Countries}}
{{WPCountries
{{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors|user=Dhtwiki|date=1–21 April 2024|old-user-1=Learnerktm|old-date-1=4–7 March 2024}}
|class=B
|importance=high
| b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = yes
| b2 <!--Coverage and accuracy --> = yes
| b3 <!--Structure --> = yes
| b4 <!--Grammar and style --> = yes
| b5 <!--Supporting materials --> = yes
| b6 <!--Accessible --> = yes
}}
}}
{{Backwardscopy
{{WikiProject Italy
|author = Surhone, L. M.
|importance=top
|class=B
|year = 2010
|title = Venice Film Festival: Film festival, Giuseppe Volpi di Misurata, Venice, Italy, Venice Biennale, contemporary art
}}
|org = Betascript Publishing OCLC 690960492, ISBN 9786130449407
{{WP1.0
|comments =
|v0.5=pass
|author2 = Miller, F. P.
|class=B
|year2 = 2008
|category=Geography
|title2 = Luigi Galvani: Physician, physicist, Italy, Bologna, bioelectromagnetism, nervous system, genitourinary system, auditory system, comparative anatomy. OCLC 695532583, ISBN 9786131767197
|VA=yes
|org2 = Alpha script publishing
|WPCD=yes
|bot=Living Bot
}}
}}
{{OnThisDay|date1=2005-04-25|oldid1=16335164}}
{{Archive box|
----
''Please do not edit archived pages. If you want to react to a statement made in an archived discussion, please make a new header on THIS page.'' [[User:Baristarim|Baristarim]] 20:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
----
*[[Talk:Italy/Archive 1|Archive 1: to December 8, 2006]]
*[[Talk:Italy/Archive 2|Archive 2: to November 23, 2007]]
*[[Talk:Italy/Archive 3|Archive 3: to –––]]
*[[Talk:Italy/Archive 4|Archive 4: to –––]]
}}
}}
{{Annual report|[[Wikipedia:2010 Top 50 Report|2010]]|8,006,275}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}}
|archiveheader = {{Aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 4
|counter = 8
|minthreadsleft = 5
|minthreadsleft = 4
|algo = old(90d)
|algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:Italy/Archive %(counter)d
|archive = Talk:Italy/Archive %(counter)d
}}{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=Talk:Italy/Archive index
|mask=Talk:Italy/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=yes
}}
}}
{{section sizes}}
{{Auto archiving notice |bot=MiszaBot I |age=90 |small=yes |dounreplied=yes}}
{{User:WildBot/m01|dabs={{User:WildBot/m03|1|Rhein}}, {{User:WildBot/m03|1|Siracusa}}|m01}}

== Metropolitan area ==

===Source wrong===
Yes, I've seen, but, the metropolitan area of Rome is not the second of italy!!! it's wrong and parochial!! multiple (many many many) sources indicate it's the third of italy, after Milan and Naples, by population, please!!! you can see here: [[Naples]]!! also in italian wikipedia page, franch, Spanish, etc..!! please, I believe that this source must be controlled.... not fanaticism please!!! you must write that multiple of sources say metropolitan area of Naples is the second!! how you can well see!!

== Site address of Italian railways ==

The address of Italian State Railways http://www.trenitalia.it/en/index.html is not correct.
The right one is http://www.ferroviedellostato.it/homepage_en.html

== I want to help ==

I am from Italy. Let me know if I can help with this page. Thanks. --[[User:SamantaGhezzi|SamantaGhezzi]] ([[User talk:SamantaGhezzi|talk]]) 13:57, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

== Sport ==

The part on cricket are a bit too harsh. There are about three sports more famous than cricket in Italy and, of course, more succesful: volleyball, male and female, basket and baseball. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Mmignola|Mmignola]] ([[User talk:Mmignola|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Mmignola|contribs]]) 19:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Peninsula?? ==

Is Italy, in your opinion, only a peninsula? Some northern separatist could agree with this oddy statement but the reality is different: at least 1/3 of the country is totally continental. Please correct this statement (See italian Wiki) , thanks [[User:Franjklogos|Franjklogos]] ([[User talk:Franjklogos|talk]]) 17:04, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
:I would argue that the peninsula starts where the Alps begin descending towards the sea, same as the [[Indian subcontinent]]. [[User:Brutaldeluxe|Brutal Deluxe]] ([[User talk:Brutaldeluxe|talk]]) 17:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

You correctly refer to India as a [[subcontinent]] of [[Asia]] and I agree with you. But Italy has never been considered a sub continental part of [[Europe]] (I admit the difference is subtile) and a peninsula starts where the land leaves the main coast line.No inhabitant of the [[Po Valley]] says he lives in a peninsula. My best regards. [[User:Franjklogos|Franjklogos]] ([[User talk:Franjklogos|talk]]) 14:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Franjklogos. Even if the peninsula would start where Alps begin, "italian peninsula" is a geographical term and it does not coincide with the repubblic. For instance the peninsula does not include Sicily and Sardinia, wich are islands.
I would take off all occurrences of "Italian peninsula" in this article, just because it is not the same as "Italy" as a state.
[[Italian Peninsula]] has a different entry. Marco[[Special:Contributions/151.21.197.154|151.21.197.154]] ([[User talk:151.21.197.154|talk]]) 09:57, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Moreover, I disagree with this sentence: "Italy is a country located partly on the European Continent and partly on the Italian Peninsula in Southern Europe...". A peninsula is part of the continent. See [[Continental Europe]]. Marco [[Special:Contributions/151.21.197.154|151.21.197.154]] ([[User talk:151.21.197.154|talk]]) 10:10, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
:The article is correct as it stands, see the Topography section: not all of Italy is in the peninsula, some parts are located outside the drainage basin of the Alps.[[User:Brutaldeluxe|Brutal Deluxe]] ([[User talk:Brutaldeluxe|talk]]) 10:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

== Cinema of Italy ==

This section requires expansion. Wikipedia largely underestimates the importance of Italian cinema after II World war.
Where are Rossellini, Visconti, Ferreri, Bertolucci, Olmi, Bellocchio, Risi, Moretti, Tornatore, etc?
Where are the many Academy awards, Palme d'or awards, Golden Lion, European Awards (etc) won by italians?
Where are cult movies of recent years such as "Cinema paradiso", "The son's Room", "Gomorrah", "Il Divo", etc? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/87.0.54.10|87.0.54.10]] ([[User talk:87.0.54.10|talk]]) 12:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Tourism ==

I have slightly increased and added a tourist section for the following reasons:

* Italy is the world's fifth top tourist reciever and fourth top earner, so even a small subsection on the topic seems appropriate (considering that other important tourist nations such as [[France]], [[Russia]] and [[Greece]] also have subsections on the topic).

* Since tourism is possibly, along with design, cars and fashion, Italy's most successful and thriving economy sector, it was surprising that it was so small in comparison to other details of the Italian economy.

* It is good, because one can see the top visited sights and cities in Italy, with relatively recent (2008) rankings of the Euromonitor.

--[[User:Theologiae|Theologiae]] ([[User talk:Theologiae|talk]]) 17:49, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

== Where is the map of "The Real Italia"? ==

"The Real Italia" = southern part of Bruttium(Calabria)... In the past, on this article(or maybe on Calabria article!)there was a map showing Bruttium(Calabria) & writing ''Italia'' on it... What happened to this map? [[User:Böri|Böri]] ([[User talk:Böri|talk]]) 13:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

== Introduction ==

Is the introduction to this article too long? Five paragraphs seems a bit much <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.184.129.92|86.184.129.92]] ([[User talk:86.184.129.92|talk]]) 15:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->



A small mistake: Italy is the fifth (and not the sixth) most populous country in Europe, and the fourth in the European Union. (Ref.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population)

Could someone please fix this? Thanks.

[[User:Marcoderrico|Marcoderrico]] ([[User talk:Marcoderrico|talk]]) 19:35, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

:Actually, it is sixth, because it comes after Russia, Germany, Turkey, France and the UK, making it sixth.--[[User:Theologiae|Theologiae]] ([[User talk:Theologiae|talk]]) 19:48, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

== Italy ==

Italy is a country! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/173.81.158.129|173.81.158.129]] ([[User talk:173.81.158.129|talk]]) 19:38, 16 February 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Correction ==

I would like to add that the Rome municipality is the largest for the fanaticism of [[Mussolini]]! The true largest italian cities are Milan and Naples: their municipality is small beacause they refer to the historic administrative border (yet)! If we want to talk about the true border of the modern cities of Milan or Naples, we must include '''all''' the metropolitan area (the true extension of the modern cities, so).. ok? So, after "largest city", should be "largest metropolitan area" = Milan and Naples or only Milan. Please! For Italy this correction is a must! Italy is very complicated :)!--[[User:Focak|Focak]] ([[User talk:Focak|talk]]) 08:29, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Also in the french wikipedia's page! [http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italie Italie] --[[User:Focak|Focak]] ([[User talk:Focak|talk]]) 08:34, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Italy is awesome <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/97.123.136.174|97.123.136.174]] ([[User talk:97.123.136.174|talk]]) 00:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Healthcare ==

There is nothing just good-faithy of the healthcare statistics. These are the healthcare statistics, and virtually each one I've been on says the same thing. You cannot disprove it. This is the [[WHO]], the most well-known healthcare organization in the world, not some dodgy made-up results. As for now, since I can't find any reason why not to, I'm putting it back in.--[[User:Theologiae|Theologiae]] ([[User talk:Theologiae|talk]]) 15:23, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Rome is not largest city! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/79.23.34.160|79.23.34.160]] ([[User talk:79.23.34.160|talk]]) 19:07, 15 March 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Milan, not Rome ==


== Biased against Italy ==
Rome is not largest city! Rome is largest municipality (city proper), Milan and Naples are small municipality, but very big (largest) metropolitan area! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/79.23.34.160|79.23.34.160]] ([[User talk:79.23.34.160|talk]]) 19:10, 15 March 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


A lot of this is biased against Italy and written to paint a bad image of the country.
== Economy ==


Can we remove all the bad points? [[Special:Contributions/2A0A:EF40:E4A:E101:698A:BD05:47AD:E241|2A0A:EF40:E4A:E101:698A:BD05:47AD:E241]] ([[User talk:2A0A:EF40:E4A:E101:698A:BD05:47AD:E241|talk]]) 16:17, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Italy is the sixth most industrialized country in the world according to OCSE surpassing Uk in 2009, search the "secondo sorpasso" please <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/93.65.170.103|93.65.170.103]] ([[User talk:93.65.170.103|talk]]) 19:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


:If we removed all the bad points, it would be biased towards Italy. It needs to be an appropriate balance of both the good and the bad. See [[WP:NPOV]]. [[User:Nikkimaria|Nikkimaria]] ([[User talk:Nikkimaria|talk]]) 05:05, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
:I did (although you didn't specify where the search should be conducted, or the name of the paper to find) and got [http://www.osce.org/search/?displayMode=3&lsi=1&q=secondo+sorpasso one unrelated document]. Do you have better details, or a link, so that we can verify your claim? <font color="#8b4513">[[User:Mindmatrix|Mind]]</font><font color="#ee8811">[[User_talk:Mindmatrix|matrix]]</font> 21:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
::take the good with the bad [[Special:Contributions/205.223.223.251|205.223.223.251]] ([[User talk:205.223.223.251|talk]]) 17:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
:::If it's a perfectly neutral article it's very positive, but if it's even a little biased against Italy it would be a very bad thing. [[User:JacktheBrown|JacktheBrown]] ([[User talk:JacktheBrown|talk]]) 17:20, 24 September 2024 (UTC)


:"A lot of this is biased against Italy and written to paint a bad image of the country." For example? [[User:JacktheBrown|JacktheBrown]] ([[User talk:JacktheBrown|talk]]) 12:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
'''Uhm... ok, there are several financial papers, but I prefer The Daily Telegraph, here is the link''' http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/recession/6418344/UK-economy-overtaken-by-Italy.html


== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 September 2024 ==
Another thing, why do you talk about italy as '''the sick man of europe''' (Italy has often been referred the sick man of Europe)? '''According to this link''' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sick_man_of_Europe '''in 2008 the nickname was given to Italy by The Daily Telegraph''', the same Daily Telegraph that now has stated "Italy overtakes London", and so, who is the sick man of europe now? - Alex64 <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/93.65.170.103|93.65.170.103]] ([[User talk:93.65.170.103|talk]]) 07:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


{{Edit extended-protected|Italy|answered=yes}}
:First, '''I''' haven't said or written anything about Italy as "the sick man of Europe"; don't attribute to me what you read in WP articles. Second, what the media does isn't Wikipedia's concern; we're only documenting things, not taking promotional or editorial positions. If the media has called Italy "the sick man of Europe", and there are [[WP:RS|valid references]] for it, then there's no issue in stating it in an article. As you'll note at [[Sick man of Europe]], the label has been applied to many countries on a rotating basis. (Frankly, I think it's a meaningless term, as every economy has its own dysfunction.) You're more than welcome to update the articles to reflect the current situation. <font color="#8b4513">[[User:Mindmatrix|Mind]]</font><font color="#ee8811">[[User_talk:Mindmatrix|matrix]]</font> 19:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Add more information about the ethnic groups indigenous to Italian territory and their languages - both recognised, partially recognised and unrecognised. [[User:Lllalll2|Lllalll2]] ([[User talk:Lllalll2|talk]]) 18:17, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:EEp --> ⸺([[User talk:Randomstaplers|'''Random''']])[[User:Randomstaplers|staplers]] 18:28, 7 September 2024 (UTC)


== 'Prime ministre is wrong' ==
I haven't attributed anything to you, and I do my apologies if my words seem too harsh, somehow; in any case, OCSE data is not a "promotional thing", that page of Daily Telegraph is about OCSE data - Alex64 <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/93.65.170.103|93.65.170.103]] ([[User talk:93.65.170.103|talk]]) 02:50, 17 March 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


I can't update the article because Im not a registered user - Alex64 <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/93.65.170.103|93.65.170.103]] ([[User talk:93.65.170.103|talk]]) 13:42, 18 March 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Can we remove "prime minister" and use the proper word "president of the council"? Prime minister is just wrong because se it has a completely different meaning [[Special:Contributions/93.44.5.84|93.44.5.84]] ([[User talk:93.44.5.84|talk]]) 11:00, 6 October 2024 (UTC)


:I don't think it's wrong. The prime minister is the head of the executive branch which is exactly what a "presidente del consiglio" is. Moreover, I remind you that in Italy the term "primo ministro" is also used. [[User:ContiNuziali|ContiNuziali]] ([[User talk:ContiNuziali|talk]]) 08:02, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
== ECONOMY ==
:Most heads of governments are styled in English as "Prime Minister". I mean even in formal contexts such as at the UN.[[User:Barjimoa|Barjimoa]] ([[User talk:Barjimoa|talk]]) 11:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)


== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 October 2024 ==
Economy of southern italy is not based mainly on agriculture, stop to write bullshits!!!
tertiary and industry are the main economic resources of Southern Italy! <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Daygum|Daygum]] ([[User talk:Daygum|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Daygum|contribs]]) 19:48, 21 March 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


{{edit extended-protected|Italy|answered=yes}}
== Giorgio Napolitano ==
[[User:Bobbyiscool123|Bobbyiscool123]] ([[User talk:Bobbyiscool123|talk]]) 02:10, 15 October 2024 (UTC)


== Sentence (important) ==
Giorgio Napolitano is not from PD! correct it! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/151.49.97.223|151.49.97.223]] ([[User talk:151.49.97.223|talk]]) 23:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


I think we should remove the sentence "During the [[The General Crisis|17th and 18th centuries]], Italian economic importance waned significantly." from the first part of the article; why, while the wikilink refers to the whole of Europe, is this sentence only present on the [[Italy]] page and not, for example, on the [[Spain]], [[France]], [[England]], and [[Netherlands]] pages? [[User:JacktheBrown|JacktheBrown]] ([[User talk:JacktheBrown|talk]]) 18:48, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
== Missing topics ==
:It should be either removed or rewritten – there was no "Italy" in an economic sense until 1861, and there's apparently no consensus that there ever was a [[General Crisis]] (European nations were expanding rapidly in the Americas, Britain, Holland and Portugal were busy taking over control of most of the Far East at about that time and probably all becoming much more powerful as a result); nor do I see that the hypothetical crisis was an economic one. The economic significance of the some of the various regional divisions of the Italian peninsula may or may not have waned at that time, that would need to be researched (I know almost nothing about the history of economics, I wouldn't know). [[User:Justlettersandnumbers|Justlettersandnumbers]] ([[User talk:Justlettersandnumbers|talk]]) 19:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)


== Cuisine (solved) ==
Two very important topics are missing: '''Environment''' (recycling, waste disposal, environmental disasters [Vajont, Seveso], renewable energy) and Crime (the Mafia, Camorra, Ndrangheta, Sacra Corona Unita, petty crime, violent crime, murder rate, excessive length of trials, corruption, collusion, fraud etc.). The second list is rather long and surely deserves a mention. [[User:Brutaldeluxe|Brutal Deluxe]] ([[User talk:Brutaldeluxe|talk]]) 11:36, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


Recently, [[User:Fountains of Bryn Mawr|a user]] has removed a truthful sentence supported by a very reliable source from the [[Italy]] page ([https://en.m.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Italy&diff=prev&oldid=1251757435]), claiming that it's [[MOS:PEACOCK]]. If this user is right, the sentence "French cuisine is one of the most widely appreciated gastronomies worldwide." should be removed from the [[France]] page (section: [[France#Cuisine]]), and not just from the Italy page; since both cuisines are, according to people, among the most renowned in the world, it makes no sense to keep the phrase on the France page and not on the Italy page. [[User:JacktheBrown|JacktheBrown]] ([[User talk:JacktheBrown|talk]]) 17:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
== Improving the quality ==


:We do not add or keep content in an article because other articles have that content (see [[WP:OTHERCONTENT]]). "both cuisines are, according to people, among the most renowned in the world" - you can see the pitfall, you can make that claim about every country, the solutions is not to make subjective proclamations (see [[MOS:PEACOCK]]). [[User:Fountains of Bryn Mawr|Fountains of Bryn Mawr]] ([[User talk:Fountains of Bryn Mawr|talk]]) 19:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
* Article is too long, one way of improving this is to leave one picture per section and eliminate the tedious lists of statistics from the main body (see [[WP:NOT#STATS]]).


'''Solved'''; see [[Talk:France#Cuisine|here]]. [[User:JacktheBrown|JacktheBrown]] ([[User talk:JacktheBrown|talk]]) 13:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
*Some edits are not taking into account that the article is already of a reasonable quality, see [[Wikipedia:Defending article quality]]


== Cultural superpower ==
*There seems to be no criterium as to which companies are mentioned in the article, I view this as a type of advertising, and do not welcome it. Commercial enterprises should only be mentioned to support a point, if at all, in a country article.


@[[User:JacktheBrown|JacktheBrown]], regarding [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Italy&oldid=1253894247 this edit]: No, the question of whether a country can be considered a cultural superpower is not a matter of "fact or not", but a mere matter of whether the media describes it as such a type of superpower. That the U.S. has the largest economy by nominal GDP is a fact; however, that it has the "most powerful economy", like you put it, is a personal opinion; a subjective conclusion drawn from this fact. Some would argue that China, despite not having the objectively largest economy nominally, has a more "powerful economy" than the U.S. because of higher exports and manufacturing output, higher PPP-adjusted GDP, larger workforce, more patent applications, etc. Everything that cannot be objectively measured, such as an abstract concept like "power", is not a question of "fact or not", but a matter of whether reliable sources have described something as such or not. [[User:Maxeto0910|Maxeto0910]] ([[User talk:Maxeto0910|talk]]) 13:11, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
*The style is inconsistent, and some things are mentioned more than once (e.g. Renzo Piano mentioned twice in Architecture), several times infact for others.


== Information on the impact of climate change on Italy ==
*The article has a very promotional tone in places (Italy the top producer of Kiwis?), and lacks NPOV. [[User:Brutaldeluxe|Brutal Deluxe]] ([[User talk:Brutaldeluxe|talk]]) 18:25, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


Hi all
:I respond in these ways:


Today I added a small paragraph on the impact on climate change on Italy under the section on climate, which {{u|LukeWiller}} added an image to, I have copied the text below, with a graph showing the increase in temperature in Italy I planned to include. {{u|Fbergo}} has since removed the section and in the edit summary called it 'climate change alarmism'. Please can I ask other editors their opinions, what I could do to improve the section.
:*Firstly: article may be slightly long, but really, if you take away all the refs, the article would be only about 150,000 bytes, a reasonable page size. The huge number of refs makes the page appear to be really long in bytes.


Thanks
:*Secondly, there's no problem in mentioning people twice in articles.


[[User:John Cummings|John Cummings]] ([[User talk:John Cummings|talk]]) 17:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:*Thirdly, yes, Italy is the top producer of kiwis. There's a difference between "promotional" stuff and "the truth". If the sentence said "Italy is an amazingly great agricultural producer" then that would be promotional, but a simple fact isn't.


=== Climate change ===
:*Have you seen how many negative points there are in the economy section? This article contains many good and bad points, something every article should have.


{{Main|Climate change in Italy}}
:*If you think the Italy page is "one of a kind", then see [[Russia]], [[UK]] or [[Hungary]]. These are overly tedious and long pages, not Italy. As I said, the main thing which makes Italy look overly long is the 200 or what references. If those were taken away, you'd see the article is far shorter than it really is. As it's standing, I think all editors have done a great job in helping this artice's quality, and I think, as it is now, if a few parts are mended, it could reach at least good article status.--[[User:Theologiae|Theologiae]] ([[User talk:Theologiae|talk]]) 07:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
:::It would be nice to get the article to A class, but I wasn't referring to the size in kb, but in visible text. [[User:Theologiae|Theologiae]], how do you justify giving the names of companies as examples? What is your criterium? Why these companies and not others? Why not mention others that give you a discount if you promise to put their name in Wikipedia? [[User:Brutaldeluxe|Brutal Deluxe]] ([[User talk:Brutaldeluxe|talk]]) 10:31, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


[[File:Temperature Bar Chart Europe-Italy--1901-2020--2021-07-13.png|thumb|Temperature change over the last 100 years in Italy showing an increase in the average temperature the last two decades.]]
::::It's not supposed to be a list of all of Italy's companies, more rather the very famous ones. It's just so a reader of the page can know briefly a few of the very top companies of the country, not any form of advertisement of promotional statements.--[[User:Theologiae|Theologiae]] ([[User talk:Theologiae|talk]]) 10:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
[[File:Where the river ends.jpg|thumb|The [[River Trebbia]], a tributary of the Po, pictured in summer 2017, is vulnerable to drought<ref>{{Cite web |date=2022-03-17 |title=Climate Crisis: Po hit by severe drought after 100 days without rain |url=https://www.ansa.it/english/news/general_news/2022/03/17/po-hit-by-severe-drought-100-days-without-rain_d3b28a1f-821a-466b-9dc5-71619bacbc76.html |access-date=2022-07-15 |website=ANSA.it |language=en}}</ref>]]
:::::You're missing the point. Why is there a need to provide examples of companies? Why those companies? The section is just as useful without them. [[User:Brutaldeluxe|Brutal Deluxe]] ([[User talk:Brutaldeluxe|talk]]) 15:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
::::::*Another point: the "fact" that Italy and "especially Rome" have an "important role in worldwide organisations" was supported by a link to the FAO job page. Whoever was responsible for that should take a long and hard look at themselves. Theologiae, I've been trying to understand what "'''attribution of old version of this page'''" means, but I have absolutely no clue. [[User:Brutaldeluxe|Brutal Deluxe]] ([[User talk:Brutaldeluxe|talk]]) 09:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


Italy is experiencing widespread impacts of [[Climate change|climate change,]] with an increase in extreme events such as heatwaves, droughts and more frequent flooding eg [[Venice]] is facing increasing issues due to [[sea level rise]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Umgiesser |first1=Georg |date=April 2020 |title=The impact of operating the mobile barriers in Venice (MOSE) under climate change |url=http://venezia2021.corila.it/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/1-s2.0-S1617138119302079-main.pdf |journal=Journal for Nature Conservation |volume=54 |pages=125783 |doi=10.1016/j.jnc.2019.125783 |s2cid=212790209 |access-date=9 July 2022}}</ref><ref name="Levantesi">{{cite journal |last1=Levantesi |first1=Stella |date=2 November 2021 |title=Assessing Italy's climate risk |journal=Nature Italy |doi=10.1038/d43978-021-00136-0 |s2cid=242053771}}</ref> Italy faces many challenges [[Climate change adaptation|adapting to climate change]] including the economic, social, and environmental impacts that climate change creates, and an increasingly problematic death toll from the [[Effects of climate change on human health|health risks that come with climate change]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Italy — Climate-ADAPT |url=https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/countries-regions/countries/italy |access-date=2022-07-10 |website=climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=2022-07-05 |title=Italy Faces National Climate Emergency to Add to Debt Woes |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-05/italy-faces-new-national-climate-emergency-to-add-to-debt-woes |access-date=2022-07-09 |work=Bloomberg.com |language=en}}</ref> [[User:John Cummings|John Cummings]] ([[User talk:John Cummings|talk]]) 17:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::This means that, since I heard that you had to attribute information that you take from wikipedia, (I heard) that you have to do so even with an old version of the page (I may be wrong, but I didn't want to make the mistake).--[[User:Theologiae|Theologiae]] ([[User talk:Theologiae|talk]]) 09:33, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
{{reflist-talk}}
::::::Do you mean ''reference''? Are you referring to the fact that you cannot use other wiki articles as a source? Write it in Italian if it's easier. I will translate for other users' benefit. [[User:Brutaldeluxe|Brutal Deluxe]] ([[User talk:Brutaldeluxe|talk]]) 09:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


: I came here through a mention on the WikiProjects Climate Change talk page. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Climate_change#Adding_summary_of_climate_change_to_country_articles . I agree with User:John Cummings that ''some content'' on climate change, as well as a wikilink to [[climate change in Italy]] should be included. The exact wording could be tweaked, e.g. if the wording regarding Venice flooding is not quite right then it should also be adjusted at [[climate change in Italy]]. Yes, there are also other causes to flooding of Venice but I thought it's established science that [[sea level rise]] is making the problem worse, right? Climate change is also increasing the intensity of droughts and floods (in many regions). Are you, {{u|LukeWiller}}, objecting to ''any content'' on climate change to be added, or is it just the specific wording that you objected to? I am not sure exactly which part you would label as "alarmist". We could add better references to the [[IPCC Sixth Assessment Report]] maybe and also improve the lead of [[climate change in Italy]], from where the content was taken. [[User:EMsmile|EMsmile]] ([[User talk:EMsmile|talk]]) 21:10, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:::::::No, I mean attribution as in copying within wikipedia. I heard this, so I'm not 100% sure, but I heard that if you copy-paste any info from any revision, old or new, of a wikipedia page, you have to attribute it (as in for the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license).--[[User:Theologiae|Theologiae]] ([[User talk:Theologiae|talk]]) 10:10, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
::::::::I've never heard of it, or seen it done. I'm sure it's not a problem if you don't do it, as long as the edit summary makes sense.[[User:Brutaldeluxe|Brutal Deluxe]] ([[User talk:Brutaldeluxe|talk]]) 10:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


:P.S. for a more informed discussion, I am copying here what the edit summary by Fbergo said exactly: "generic alarmist subsection removed. Seasonal flooding in Venice has been occurring for centuries and is not solely caused by human-induced climate change. The rest of the subsection was completely generic climate change alarmism, applicable to any country article by changing Italy to any other country name." --> the sentence in question didn't actually say that flooding is solely caused by climate change but said "more frequent flooding of Venice". I agree that the other sentence could be made more Italy-specific. I think the two images that you removed were indeed Italy specific and should go back in. But I disagree that any of this is overly "alarmist". It's simply stating facts. [[User:EMsmile|EMsmile]] ([[User talk:EMsmile|talk]]) 21:31, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
== St Peter's Basilica ==
::{{u|EMsmile}} No, I just added the image: in my opinion it's a chapter that can be done without. The concept of climate change in Italy is already discussed at the bottom of the article "Climate of Italy", where there is a link to the in-depth article. [[User:LukeWiller|LukeWiller]] ([[User talk:LukeWiller|talk]]) 22:22, 4 November 2024 (UTC).
In the collage of Italian churches, I fully acknowledge the fact that St Peter's Basilica isn't technically part of Italy, but I've restored the collage under these measures (I have made it clear that the basilica is not legally part of the country):
:::A sentence or two would be more than acceptable in the current section. A subsection on any topic would be a bit undue..... would be like adding a section under biodiversity for endangered species..... simply no need for a new section just Incorporated a few key points with a link to a main article in the existing section. <span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue">[[User:Moxy|Moxy]]</span>🍁 23:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
::::I agree with {{u|Moxy}}. [[User:LukeWiller|LukeWiller]] ([[User talk:LukeWiller|talk]]) 00:12, 5 November 2024 (UTC).
:::::Just going to copy this over to here..... original responded to this query at the wiki project first.."This has come up many times.....best solution thus far is incorporation into current section with a few sentences as seen at [[Canada#Climate]]. The problem we come across is a random generic section that regurgitates the same gibberish on page after page....that is... increase flooding, increased drought etc etc. Two or three sentences incorporated throughout an existing section on climate would be the best course of action if it's not just generic text. The country project talks about main article fixation like this at [[WP:COUNTRYSECTIONS]]. A section should summarize the main parent article [[Climate of Italy]] in an appropriate manner over summarizing every sub article on climate about Italy." <span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue">[[User:Moxy|Moxy]]</span>🍁 00:16, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
:Hi there. My concerns with the subsection, which led me to remove it, are the following: 1) Undue weight and/or irrelevance: Climate change is, supposedly, global. Is Italy among the most affected countries, or is it affected in some peculiar way that distiguishes it from other countries? I don't think so, and the content and sources added do not seem to present such a case. 2) Most country articles are longer than recommended (by [[WP:AS]] and [[WP:TOOBIG]]), and I think we should avoid expanding such articles with content that is redundant, contentious, or poorly sourced. 3) The section started with "Italy is experiencing widespread impacts...", without a specific time frame, as if it were reporting a current event ([[WP:CEE]]?). If such section is added, it needs better wording. 4) Venice does not seem to be a good example: it is both a one-of-a-kind city with its canals, where floodings are expected, and the sea level rise in the region is also affected by tectonic plate movement, a phenomenon that cannot be blamed on human activity. The main article [[Climate change in Italy]] certainly could be linked somewhere. As an example, the [[Brazil]] article links to its national climate change article in the lead, incorporating it in the natural text flow. [[User:Fbergo|Fbergo]] ([[User talk:Fbergo|talk]]) 06:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)


::Hi {{u|Fbergo}} thank you for your reply, I had a couple of follow up questions to gain clarity on what you mean and what you would like from information about climate change in this article:
* The image of St Peter's Basilica appears in most travel books and guides of Italy.
::# You say that "climate change is, supposedly, global", I'm not sure what you mean by 'supposedly', could you explain further?
* It was part of the country until 1929
::# You say that we should avoid adding content that is 'redundant, contentious, or poorly sourced', could you explain further? Which of these do you think relates to the information that was added? or are you saying that any information on climate change would be redundant or contentious?
* It is geographically part of Italy
::# In your edit summary you say the information was 'climate change alarmism', could you say more about what you mean by this? Are you making a judgement on the reliability of climate change predictions in general? Or something else?
* It is in Rome, Italy's capital
::Thanks again
* Italian is widely spoken
::[[User:John Cummings|John Cummings]] ([[User talk:John Cummings|talk]]) 14:59, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
* It is culturally nearly identical to Italy
:::I think Fbergo and Moxy made good points - thank you! And I think the lead of [[climate change in Italy]] is rather poor. So if we want to take content from there, we should improve on that content first. Giving more Italy-specific examples of the [[effects of climate change]] would be good. The more intense drought conditions affecting the river Po is a good example, isn't it? And I think one or both of the removed climate change images should go back in (if it's the one with the river Po, make the caption clearer).
* Yet most importantly, it was built by Italian architects. If you go on [[culture of Denmark]], you'll see a pic of the Sydney operahouse, which is not technically in Denmark, yet was built by Danish architects, and is considered a Danish work of art. St Peter's Basilica is an Italian work, yet is not found in Italy any longer. It's like saying the [[Mona Lisa]] is should not be shown on an Italy-related page just because it's no longer found in Italy.
:::I am not sure I agree with this statement of Moxy: "A section should summarize the main parent article [[Climate of Italy]]" because in my opinion [[climate in Italy]] might not be the best location where the ''effects of climate change'' in Italy should be located. They should in fact be at [[climate change in Italy]]. The reason why I think so is because some of the effects go well beyond just "climate". E.g. [[sea level rise]] or [[effects of climate change on human health]] goes beyond what one would expect at [[climate in Italy]]. That's why we have all those "climate change in country X" articles in the first place (but many of them are not yet in great shape). Let me also ping [[User:sadads]] to this conversation. [[User:EMsmile|EMsmile]] ([[User talk:EMsmile|talk]]) 16:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)


== On the causes of Italian prolonged political division ==
--[[User:Theologiae|Theologiae]] ([[User talk:Theologiae|talk]]) 07:04, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


In the main section, I would remove the line "However, centuries of rivalry and infighting between city-states left the peninsula divided."
*Wikipedia is not a travel guide, the article is about the Italian republic.
*So was Istria
*So is Corsica
*So is the Order of Malta
*Just like in Lugano
*British roads were tarmaced by Italians, let's have a picture of a British road.


This line is in part redundant because of the paragraph that follows. Moreover, it establishes an unsupported causal relation. Indeed, it is perfectly possible that centuries of collaboration and alliances would still have left the peninsula divided. [[User:ContiNuziali|ContiNuziali]] ([[User talk:ContiNuziali|talk]]) 10:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Instead of buildings, why not go for Italian clergymen? Don Bosco, Don Benzi and what about [[Bishop Richard Williamson]]? He must have been in Italy at some point.


:{{Ping|ContiNuziali}} this sentence, I believe, was added to underline the fact that there's a large economic difference, still unresolved, between [[Northern Italy|north]] and [[Southern Italy|south]].
::First of all, I'm not talking about travel guides, but travel books. There's a difference. Travel guides are meant to promote holiday destinations. Travel books are books which describe how countries are in a far more accurate and less promotional way than guides. Secondly, the comparisons you have made are not valid. This section is on religion, not British roads. Thirdly, this article is about the Italian republic all right, and I acknowledge that, yet, it was made clear in the blurb that St Peter's Basilica is not ''legally'' part of Italy. I find your idea about clergymen to be not relevant. This is about religion, not people. Thank you.--[[User:Theologiae|Theologiae]] ([[User talk:Theologiae|talk]]) 12:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
:But I might agree with you. [[User:JacktheBrown|JacktheBrown]] ([[User talk:JacktheBrown|talk]]) 02:27, 13 November 2024 (UTC)


== Size ==


14005 words is getting way big again [[WP:COUNTRYSIZE]]. New section about a holiday can go<small> ([[Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries#Transclusions]])</small> <span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue">[[User:Moxy|Moxy]]</span>🍁 00:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
==Picture Mislabelled==
For the picture of the flora and fauna of Italy, the caption says that the names go clockwise, but in that case the bluethroat and the praying mantis are switched around. Either the picture needs to be changed accordingly or (more likely) the caption should be amended to accurately represent the picture. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/129.89.223.45|129.89.223.45]] ([[User talk:129.89.223.45|talk]]) 15:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Latest revision as of 07:11, 14 December 2024

Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 13, 2012Peer reviewReviewed

Biased against Italy

[edit]

A lot of this is biased against Italy and written to paint a bad image of the country.

Can we remove all the bad points? 2A0A:EF40:E4A:E101:698A:BD05:47AD:E241 (talk) 16:17, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If we removed all the bad points, it would be biased towards Italy. It needs to be an appropriate balance of both the good and the bad. See WP:NPOV. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:05, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
take the good with the bad 205.223.223.251 (talk) 17:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it's a perfectly neutral article it's very positive, but if it's even a little biased against Italy it would be a very bad thing. JacktheBrown (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"A lot of this is biased against Italy and written to paint a bad image of the country." For example? JacktheBrown (talk) 12:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 September 2024

[edit]

Add more information about the ethnic groups indigenous to Italian territory and their languages - both recognised, partially recognised and unrecognised. Lllalll2 (talk) 18:17, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ⸺(Random)staplers 18:28, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'Prime ministre is wrong'

[edit]

Can we remove "prime minister" and use the proper word "president of the council"? Prime minister is just wrong because se it has a completely different meaning 93.44.5.84 (talk) 11:00, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's wrong. The prime minister is the head of the executive branch which is exactly what a "presidente del consiglio" is. Moreover, I remind you that in Italy the term "primo ministro" is also used. ContiNuziali (talk) 08:02, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most heads of governments are styled in English as "Prime Minister". I mean even in formal contexts such as at the UN.Barjimoa (talk) 11:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 October 2024

[edit]
Bobbyiscool123 (talk) 02:10, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence (important)

[edit]

I think we should remove the sentence "During the 17th and 18th centuries, Italian economic importance waned significantly." from the first part of the article; why, while the wikilink refers to the whole of Europe, is this sentence only present on the Italy page and not, for example, on the Spain, France, England, and Netherlands pages? JacktheBrown (talk) 18:48, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It should be either removed or rewritten – there was no "Italy" in an economic sense until 1861, and there's apparently no consensus that there ever was a General Crisis (European nations were expanding rapidly in the Americas, Britain, Holland and Portugal were busy taking over control of most of the Far East at about that time and probably all becoming much more powerful as a result); nor do I see that the hypothetical crisis was an economic one. The economic significance of the some of the various regional divisions of the Italian peninsula may or may not have waned at that time, that would need to be researched (I know almost nothing about the history of economics, I wouldn't know). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cuisine (solved)

[edit]

Recently, a user has removed a truthful sentence supported by a very reliable source from the Italy page ([1]), claiming that it's MOS:PEACOCK. If this user is right, the sentence "French cuisine is one of the most widely appreciated gastronomies worldwide." should be removed from the France page (section: France#Cuisine), and not just from the Italy page; since both cuisines are, according to people, among the most renowned in the world, it makes no sense to keep the phrase on the France page and not on the Italy page. JacktheBrown (talk) 17:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We do not add or keep content in an article because other articles have that content (see WP:OTHERCONTENT). "both cuisines are, according to people, among the most renowned in the world" - you can see the pitfall, you can make that claim about every country, the solutions is not to make subjective proclamations (see MOS:PEACOCK). Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 19:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Solved; see here. JacktheBrown (talk) 13:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural superpower

[edit]

@JacktheBrown, regarding this edit: No, the question of whether a country can be considered a cultural superpower is not a matter of "fact or not", but a mere matter of whether the media describes it as such a type of superpower. That the U.S. has the largest economy by nominal GDP is a fact; however, that it has the "most powerful economy", like you put it, is a personal opinion; a subjective conclusion drawn from this fact. Some would argue that China, despite not having the objectively largest economy nominally, has a more "powerful economy" than the U.S. because of higher exports and manufacturing output, higher PPP-adjusted GDP, larger workforce, more patent applications, etc. Everything that cannot be objectively measured, such as an abstract concept like "power", is not a question of "fact or not", but a matter of whether reliable sources have described something as such or not. Maxeto0910 (talk) 13:11, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Information on the impact of climate change on Italy

[edit]

Hi all

Today I added a small paragraph on the impact on climate change on Italy under the section on climate, which LukeWiller added an image to, I have copied the text below, with a graph showing the increase in temperature in Italy I planned to include. Fbergo has since removed the section and in the edit summary called it 'climate change alarmism'. Please can I ask other editors their opinions, what I could do to improve the section.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 17:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Climate change

[edit]
Temperature change over the last 100 years in Italy showing an increase in the average temperature the last two decades.
The River Trebbia, a tributary of the Po, pictured in summer 2017, is vulnerable to drought[1]

Italy is experiencing widespread impacts of climate change, with an increase in extreme events such as heatwaves, droughts and more frequent flooding eg Venice is facing increasing issues due to sea level rise.[2][3] Italy faces many challenges adapting to climate change including the economic, social, and environmental impacts that climate change creates, and an increasingly problematic death toll from the health risks that come with climate change.[4][5] John Cummings (talk) 17:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Climate Crisis: Po hit by severe drought after 100 days without rain". ANSA.it. 2022-03-17. Retrieved 2022-07-15.
  2. ^ Umgiesser, Georg (April 2020). "The impact of operating the mobile barriers in Venice (MOSE) under climate change" (PDF). Journal for Nature Conservation. 54: 125783. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2019.125783. S2CID 212790209. Retrieved 9 July 2022.
  3. ^ Levantesi, Stella (2 November 2021). "Assessing Italy's climate risk". Nature Italy. doi:10.1038/d43978-021-00136-0. S2CID 242053771.
  4. ^ "Italy — Climate-ADAPT". climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu. Retrieved 2022-07-10.
  5. ^ "Italy Faces National Climate Emergency to Add to Debt Woes". Bloomberg.com. 2022-07-05. Retrieved 2022-07-09.
I came here through a mention on the WikiProjects Climate Change talk page. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Climate_change#Adding_summary_of_climate_change_to_country_articles . I agree with User:John Cummings that some content on climate change, as well as a wikilink to climate change in Italy should be included. The exact wording could be tweaked, e.g. if the wording regarding Venice flooding is not quite right then it should also be adjusted at climate change in Italy. Yes, there are also other causes to flooding of Venice but I thought it's established science that sea level rise is making the problem worse, right? Climate change is also increasing the intensity of droughts and floods (in many regions). Are you, LukeWiller, objecting to any content on climate change to be added, or is it just the specific wording that you objected to? I am not sure exactly which part you would label as "alarmist". We could add better references to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report maybe and also improve the lead of climate change in Italy, from where the content was taken. EMsmile (talk) 21:10, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. for a more informed discussion, I am copying here what the edit summary by Fbergo said exactly: "generic alarmist subsection removed. Seasonal flooding in Venice has been occurring for centuries and is not solely caused by human-induced climate change. The rest of the subsection was completely generic climate change alarmism, applicable to any country article by changing Italy to any other country name." --> the sentence in question didn't actually say that flooding is solely caused by climate change but said "more frequent flooding of Venice". I agree that the other sentence could be made more Italy-specific. I think the two images that you removed were indeed Italy specific and should go back in. But I disagree that any of this is overly "alarmist". It's simply stating facts. EMsmile (talk) 21:31, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
EMsmile No, I just added the image: in my opinion it's a chapter that can be done without. The concept of climate change in Italy is already discussed at the bottom of the article "Climate of Italy", where there is a link to the in-depth article. LukeWiller (talk) 22:22, 4 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]
A sentence or two would be more than acceptable in the current section. A subsection on any topic would be a bit undue..... would be like adding a section under biodiversity for endangered species..... simply no need for a new section just Incorporated a few key points with a link to a main article in the existing section. Moxy🍁 23:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Moxy. LukeWiller (talk) 00:12, 5 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Just going to copy this over to here..... original responded to this query at the wiki project first.."This has come up many times.....best solution thus far is incorporation into current section with a few sentences as seen at Canada#Climate. The problem we come across is a random generic section that regurgitates the same gibberish on page after page....that is... increase flooding, increased drought etc etc. Two or three sentences incorporated throughout an existing section on climate would be the best course of action if it's not just generic text. The country project talks about main article fixation like this at WP:COUNTRYSECTIONS. A section should summarize the main parent article Climate of Italy in an appropriate manner over summarizing every sub article on climate about Italy." Moxy🍁 00:16, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. My concerns with the subsection, which led me to remove it, are the following: 1) Undue weight and/or irrelevance: Climate change is, supposedly, global. Is Italy among the most affected countries, or is it affected in some peculiar way that distiguishes it from other countries? I don't think so, and the content and sources added do not seem to present such a case. 2) Most country articles are longer than recommended (by WP:AS and WP:TOOBIG), and I think we should avoid expanding such articles with content that is redundant, contentious, or poorly sourced. 3) The section started with "Italy is experiencing widespread impacts...", without a specific time frame, as if it were reporting a current event (WP:CEE?). If such section is added, it needs better wording. 4) Venice does not seem to be a good example: it is both a one-of-a-kind city with its canals, where floodings are expected, and the sea level rise in the region is also affected by tectonic plate movement, a phenomenon that cannot be blamed on human activity. The main article Climate change in Italy certainly could be linked somewhere. As an example, the Brazil article links to its national climate change article in the lead, incorporating it in the natural text flow. Fbergo (talk) 06:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Fbergo thank you for your reply, I had a couple of follow up questions to gain clarity on what you mean and what you would like from information about climate change in this article:
  1. You say that "climate change is, supposedly, global", I'm not sure what you mean by 'supposedly', could you explain further?
  2. You say that we should avoid adding content that is 'redundant, contentious, or poorly sourced', could you explain further? Which of these do you think relates to the information that was added? or are you saying that any information on climate change would be redundant or contentious?
  3. In your edit summary you say the information was 'climate change alarmism', could you say more about what you mean by this? Are you making a judgement on the reliability of climate change predictions in general? Or something else?
Thanks again
John Cummings (talk) 14:59, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think Fbergo and Moxy made good points - thank you! And I think the lead of climate change in Italy is rather poor. So if we want to take content from there, we should improve on that content first. Giving more Italy-specific examples of the effects of climate change would be good. The more intense drought conditions affecting the river Po is a good example, isn't it? And I think one or both of the removed climate change images should go back in (if it's the one with the river Po, make the caption clearer).
I am not sure I agree with this statement of Moxy: "A section should summarize the main parent article Climate of Italy" because in my opinion climate in Italy might not be the best location where the effects of climate change in Italy should be located. They should in fact be at climate change in Italy. The reason why I think so is because some of the effects go well beyond just "climate". E.g. sea level rise or effects of climate change on human health goes beyond what one would expect at climate in Italy. That's why we have all those "climate change in country X" articles in the first place (but many of them are not yet in great shape). Let me also ping User:sadads to this conversation. EMsmile (talk) 16:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the causes of Italian prolonged political division

[edit]

In the main section, I would remove the line "However, centuries of rivalry and infighting between city-states left the peninsula divided."

This line is in part redundant because of the paragraph that follows. Moreover, it establishes an unsupported causal relation. Indeed, it is perfectly possible that centuries of collaboration and alliances would still have left the peninsula divided. ContiNuziali (talk) 10:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ContiNuziali: this sentence, I believe, was added to underline the fact that there's a large economic difference, still unresolved, between north and south.
But I might agree with you. JacktheBrown (talk) 02:27, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Size

[edit]

14005 words is getting way big again WP:COUNTRYSIZE. New section about a holiday can go (Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries#Transclusions) Moxy🍁 00:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]