Talk:Latin Europe

Latin Europe & Latin America

I would say that latin america is the equivalent of latin europe in the american continent, not the inverse. Latin europe exist since 2000 years, while latin america had its latin influence since only 500 years (and the latin identity is only one part of latin america : we should not forget the native indian and african influences). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.59.166 (talk • contribs)

" making the term Latin America diffult to be accepted by some Latin Europeans " I don't think that latin European have any difficulty to accept and use the term latin America, as long as it is used correctly. There is traditionally strong links between the two shores of the latin world, especially with countries like Brazil, Argentina or Mexico. What some latin Europeans have difficulties to accept is that the term "latin" would be applied ONLY to latin-Americans, as the present tendency (due to US/Cuban pop culture, Cf. "latino" stars, etc.) is slowly changing the meaning in this direction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.59.166 (talk • contribs)

Well... there is a further difficulty. You see, many in Portugal and Spain reject the name Latin America as a French invention, aiming at increasing French power and intervention at what many call Ibero-America. The Ogre 13:54, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Irrelevant to speak about "core Latin Europe" or such things. Leave such stupid statements apart, they only reflect your prejudice and lack of education. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.166.244.65 (talk) 11:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Latin Europe

Parts of Europe that are latin in influence are also Istria and Dalmatia. Many of these areas were Venetian and still speak it. Also, Slovenia has Italian as an official language especially in Pirano, Pola and Capodistria. I checked this on the internet a few days ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.217.216 (talk • contribs)

Yes, this should be included as "Italian-speaking municipalities of Slovenia". Ronline ✉ 13:28, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

"Some parts of the Italian region of Friuli-Venezia Giulia are Slovenian-speaking, with Slovenian having the status of official language alongside Italian and Friulian" I'm not sure this is correct. Can anyone confirm this? Also, there are very few native Italian speakers remaining in Istria and Dalmatia, since most native Italians were displaced immediately following world war II. The influence remains in the culture, architecture and cuisine- but the latin language is now virtually extinct. 207.6.233.239 19:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

In 2006 there are not only Italians in Slovenia, but even in Croatia. They are mainly concentrated in Istria, but even in small amounts in Dalmatia, Fiume (Rijeka) and Zara (Zadar). Furthermore, the article makes no reference to the Aromanians (Vlachs) living scatered in the southern Balkans (between Greece,Albania, Macedonia, Serbia and Bulgaria). These Aromanians are a neolatin population of around 250000. The Vlachs are experiencing with the European Union an awakening revival that has allowed their recognition as a minority by the government of Macedonia. There are even communities of Romanians in the countries surrounding Romania, like Ukraine (that in the last census states that there are 325000 Moldovians/Romanians inside its borders). Brunodam (10/31/06). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunodam (talk • contribs)

Also, it is completely irrelevant and insultive to exclude Romania form the bunch of the so called "core Latin Europe" (??? the dude made the expression all by himself, nice). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Veli Koskela (talk • contribs)

Dont worry, it reads better now... Iamandrewrice (talk) 11:19, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Why can't folk just stop adding stuff like "core Latin Europe". In which way does that improve the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.232.138.137 (talk) 23:22, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Celtic?

"Brittany in France, Galicia and Asturias in Spain show a Celtic flavour" This line is terrible, Breton IS a Celtic language, specifically, a Brythonic language related to Welsh and Cornish, it's not merely a 'flavour'. The Galician language and Astur-Leonese language on the other hand are completely Latin, saying they have a 'celtic flavour' is equivalent of saying German has a 'Celtic flavour' because Celts used to inhabit pre-Roman Germany. Semi-Lobster, 22:20, 30 March 2006

I think the expression "celtic flavour" in the case of Britanny is right since the number of speakers of Breton is so small that we canno't speak of Britanny as a "celtic nation" - for 99% of population of Britanny the "celtiness" is limited to a "identity feeling" more than a real celtic culture. The same for Galicia, where people feel close to a "celticness", even if basically they are latin : a romance-speaking people. That's why excluding those regions from latin Europe would be wrong, but saying that they are latin regions with a celtic flavour describe those region much better. being myself a Breton, I like "celticness", but basically I know that it is just a mark of the past that doesn't describe my actual identity as a French and romance speaker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.59.166 (talk • contribs)

In that case, Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Cornwall and the Isle of Man should be considered Germanic nations. But they are considered Celtic instead, the Celtic language in these countries is a cultrual issue rather than a tool of every day communication. Brittany makes no difference, it's rather a Celtic nation with a Latin flavour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Veli Koskela (talk • contribs)

There is no 'Celticness' in Galacian or Asturian. The languages are thoroughly Latin. As for Brittany, Breton is spoken by 300,000 billingual, mostly elderly people, while the rest are monolingual French speakers. I never said these places should be excluded I was saying that comparing Galician and Asturian which have no Celtic influence to Brittany, which does have (an allbeit near extinct) Brythonic language was incorrect. I'm suggestion that the line about Brittany should be rewritten and speak of the billingualness of Brittany with an Oïl speaking majority and a historical autochthonous Breton language and that the mention of Galicia and Asturias as 'celtic' should be removed. Semi-Lobster, 15:43, 3 April 2006

"speak of the billingualness of Brittany". Being a Breton, I can assure you that the idea of "Britanny" as a bilingual region is false. The people who speak the language are a big minority (less than 10%), most of them know it only as a second or third language thanks to the écoles Diwan. Almost Nobody speaks Breton outside its home. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.59.166 (talk • contribs)

Indeed, Breton has almost gone the way of Cornish and Manx, and probably will be completely dead in a decade or two. And besides, Breton is not the only language of Brittany, there is also Gallo. Of course officially no language in the Republic of France recieves special treatment, but for a historical context it could be mentioned that before World War II Breton was once commonly spoken and now is spoken only by a shrinking, aged minority of people. I'm not disputing the 'Cetlicness' or the lack there of in Brittany, my main point is that there absolutely no Celtic influence linguistically on Galician and Asturian. Semi-Lobster 22:51, 3 April 2006

Huh?

I am the only one who find this sentence clunky and confunsing: " The use of the words Latin and latino as used in the United States and in the Americas to speak only about Latin-American things is considered ignorance-derived by Latin Europeans, and can be considered offensive." --chemica 06:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

It means that "latin" and "latino" means all the languages derived from latin, not only spanish and portuguese. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.99.219.102 (talk • contribs)

The English people and language are Romance

Rhode Islander 22:46, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Latin cultures

Hello everyone! You may want to go to Latin cultures an participate in the article and discussion. There are a lot of disputed statements... The Ogre 12:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Expand the Article

I really think this article could be alot better...it needs to be compared to the amount of information on the Latin America article....Demographics-people...Ecomomy....History of the latin region etc......lets Try and make it alot better....! spain17 July 2007 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.238.168 (talk • contribs)

Sections and tags

I have tagged the sections, Culture, Dance and Music, and the Gallery. The first two are anecdotical. The last is just wrong - Wikipedia is not a gallery (try the commons!). The Ogre 21:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Is afew photos of the countries that we are talking about really that wrong?...not many people actualy go to wikicommons to look at pictures anyway..unless they use them on wikipedia...thats why people uploaded them in the first place..i think. Have you seen other articles on other cities in wiki....obviously lots of other people think the same...check them out......or just add some writting yourself in the article where you think it needs different approach..... Spain21 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I am not against the pictures, what I think is that they should illustrate text, and not be a gallery in itself. The other two sections need a major re-write and expansion. The Ogre 12:43, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

oh ok, I understand but maybe if we just keep afew like that and obviously add others to when we expand the other sections of the article...Ive tried to add many sections recently just to quickly expand the article as a whole since i noticed it had just become alittle stale and thought it cold be longer..looking like the other aricles of the world....,.hopefully other people will contribute in the future. Spain21 21 July 2007 (UTC)

The flag of the Canary islands is missing on the territories table!--Burgas00 10:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Romania

So, would Romanians be classified as Latinos? Or what ethnic group do they belong to? By reading this article, I'm guessing that anyone from Latin Europe would be classified as Latino, right? Not just Spain and Portugal.

Well yes I agree that anyone from mediterranean europe is technically classified as Latino. However, I am having difficulty referencing this fact, and it seems that many people only interpret 'Latino' as the 'Latin-Americans', although yes, you are correct, Latino can also include 'Latin-Europeans'. Iamandrewrice (talk) 11:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

i have put a lot of effort into improving this article...

My main problem with it was that hardly any effort had been made about the smaller countries and states included in Latin Europe, with only France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Romania being predominantly discussed. Vatican City and Malta, I was extremely surprised at, had very insignificant mentioning. Vatican City's language is Italian however, which automatically qualifies it, and Malta, although unnoficially using Italian, has enough media outputs, such as TV, radio, documentations, use in everyday speech, and also input into own language, to be regarded. I have now ensured that Andorra, Malta, Moldova, Monaco, San Marino, and Vatican City, all are given equal worth. I will continue to work on this article however, as I think there is still a lot to improve. Iamandrewrice (talk) 11:26, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I dont think Malta is part of Latin Europe..since there is no official language that is totally descended from Latin....even though there are many words borrowed from Italian, there are only Maltese and english which both have Latin language influences but sadly that doesnt make them bother Latin languages...therefore Malta cannot be in Latin europe..ive never thought of Malta being a Lain country...but i do think youve don a good job on most of the article.. Oh and Macedonia??...part of Latin Europe...i dont agree im affraid since in order to be part of Latin Europe the country needs to use a Latin descended language Officially...The United States has millions of Spanish speakers but is not a Latin country becuase the main de facto language (even though not official) is English in roots and culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.224.1 (talk) 15:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC) Bluesky 15:03, 04 December 2007 (UTC)

flagicon - Luxembourg

Hello everyone. The flag icon of Luxembourg () does not appear on the box - there seems to be a format problem. Could someone fix it? Thank you. The Ogre 15:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Ha! Ok. Just realised the problem is a line break! Sorry! The Ogre 15:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

New version

Did a lot of work in the article. It was full of contradictions, incorrections, duplications, strange selections, POV and OR - namely after all the edits done by now indefinitely banned user Iamandrewrice. Hope now it's better. The Ogre 17:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I see you did a swipe of alot of info, although what about the Balearic Islands, they are part of spain also...although both the canarys and Balearic people dont like to think of themselves as not Spanish or seperate.....and in know you dont like afew photos of latin europe but afew shouldnt be that bad since ive seen them of many other article but not too many as the other user did..Bluesky 18:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

First of all you present yourselve as "Bluesky" whem you seem to be an anon IP adress user (81.154.224.1) - This is strange... Regarding your comments, I did not "swipe of alot of info"! The Balearic islands were not mentioned before, that I had noticed. They should be added, though, and I'll do that. Regarding your comments about what the Canarians and Balearic think, weel, that is disputed and we shouldn't get into a POV discussion. About the images, there is no problem with some images, if they do not constitute a gallery and if their have some relation with the article - I believe a bunch of turistical pictures of some cities do not. The Ogre 18:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Numerous Issues

• Which exact regions of Slovenia speak Italian?
• Is the Italian and Romanian spoken in Istria county official or non-official?
• Is the Romanian spoken in Timočka Krajina (which = Bor District + Zaječar District put together) official?
• Serbia has both co-official and non-official usage of Romanian. Therefore, in which list should it be mentioned in? or both? Crystalclearchanges (talk) 16:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Using Wikipedia itself as a source, here's what I got:

1. Italian language in Slovenia says it's official in Piran, Izola and Koper.
2. Italian language in Croatia says Italian is official in Istria County. Istro-Romanian language says Istro-Romanian is not official in Istria County.
3. Vlach language in Serbia says Romanian is not official in Timojcka-Krajina
4. Both.

SamEV (talk) 07:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that out, I have put it into the article. However, we still have various things that need discussing. If Serbia is put in both, then surely almost every single country will be? Switzerland has official (or co-official) areas speaking Romance Languages. However, there are almost undoubtedly going to be areas there where it is also un-officially spoken too? What should we do? Crystalclearchanges (talk) 10:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. I vote for including mixed official/unofficial countries in the official list, but also stating that Romance languages are spoken unofficially in some regions. SamEV (talk) 11:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

that seems like a good idea. i will start on it now Crystalclearchanges (talk) 11:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

OK. And, you want to merge Latin European with what article? SamEV (talk) 11:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

hmmm... i am not sure it is such a good idea to list them like that any more actually. If you check the current revision of that section, it doesn't work very well, and it means that the total areas in each section won't add up from the figures beneath them. I think perhaps we should just stick to listing them in both. Oh and I thought that merging Latin demonym and Latin European was advisable, or at least worth discussion. Crystalclearchanges (talk) 14:55, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

CCC, whichever way you decide to list them, that's fine. I must say, I'm not thrilled about the inclusion of land area; I think population figures should suffice. About Latin (demonym): it doesn't exist: Latin European is the article formerly known as Latin (demonym), per rename. SamEV (talk) 01:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I am currently making some large changes to that bit of it. I think it should be a lot better afterwards, but I'm not that great with html, so we'll have to wait and see ;) 89.241.246.10 (talk) 13:26, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

The map in the infobox is factually wrong. It shows as if Italian was official language in half of the country while it is in fact a co-official language (minority language) only in 3 coastal municipalities. Someone needs to take care of that. --Tone 15:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Besides, only Macedonia is coloured in red as the region where Aromanian is spoken while the article says it is spoken in Greece, Albania, Romania, Republic of Macedonia, Serbia, Bulgaria. --Tone 15:26, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm done! :) (I'm User:Crystalclearchanges by the way). We've been having problems categorizing different things, but now I've put the whole lot in a table. That is like the most complicated html I have done lol, so I'm quite proud. I think its much better now. It still needs work, but at least now we have a frame to build on.

Tone, that is not what the map says, please read the key. Regarding the map, according to the categorizations and the improvement of our understanding of smaller areas of covering, I will shortly have the colors and codes moved around and corrected, but for the moment, we need to make sure the article is ok. So what do you think guys? 89.241.246.10 (talk) 15:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I read the key. It says: yellow - Unofficial (regional) language. In Slovenia, it is a co-official minority language (in a region, considerably smaller than the map shows) so the colour is wrong. Presumably the same goes for Croatia. About Macedonia, in fact you're right, Aromanian is recognized as a minority language while in other regions it is not. Still, why tho colours (red and yellow)? --Tone 15:53, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes the map is wrong, but there is nothing we can do until we finish the table in the article, so that we can clearly see which parts should be and which parts should not be which colour on a map. If you would like to help us get the map done sooner, then one thing to do would be to help sort out the areas listed in the table itself and add as much information as you can to them. We have already been through 5 maps, each one being slightly wrong, so we don't want a repeat of last time, so we might as well just get clear on which areas should actually be in the map before we make it. Thanks 89.241.246.10 (talk) 16:00, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure, no problem with waiting a while :-) I would rather not involve in correcting the map myself because many editors mean a mess... May I just point out the gallery of notable latin Europeans? The selection is rather curious, out of 10 people there are 4 contemporary movie stars. The article would be better off without such a gallery. Otherwise, the article has developed quite nicely, good work. --Tone 16:06, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, ummm....for the map I just copied the areas coloured on the previous map, so I didn't know exactly what was what. so if you show me exactly what needs to be corrected I will correct it. nat.utoronto 19:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thats really nice of you Nat, but we're not quite ready to make a new map yet until we can actually complete the table. The map though, this time should have three colours. One for "Official", "Co-Official", and "Unofficial". 84.13.151.123 (talk) 19:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

In the regional cases, maybe you should also add "Regional" or "Regionally" below the country name, because although you show the region names in the next column, that may still not totally convey the fact by itself. But except for all that space between the table of contents and the next section, so far so good. How about you Ogre, where do you stand on this? SamEV (talk) 22:01, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

84.13.151.123, I see you were working on just that as I wrote the above message. I moved some sections around to remove the white space. I'm done. SamEV (talk) 22:26, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

God i have been working hours on this and i'm still not there ¬_¬ I will try be done soon... :) If you're wondering why i'm not logging in by the way, its because I've kinda half retired so i dont really log in... 84.13.151.123 (talk) 22:29, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

If anyone's got time... could they do the rest of the populations in the table? i'm really tired and i'm calling it a night. See you evryone x ciao 84.13.151.123 (talk) 22:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll work on it a bit later. But don't be afraid to beat me to it, anyone else who's reading this! :) SamEV (talk) 23:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Another question: Germany during the Middle Ages would have been included due to religious reasons. Why's that? Because the language of the clergy was latin? I don't see this as a significant reason to include Germany as a latin-speaking country. If there's another reason, please make it clearer. And source it. --Tone 14:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't the section on Religion be removed as was done with the one on Culture? It just seems out of place in the article. Also, why do the countries' GDP need to be included in the table? What exactly is this adding to the article? --Gibmetal 77^talk 14:21, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I am going to merge the religion into the table. The religion is slightly more relevant than the culture because Latin Europe is regarded as sharing Latin religions as well as languages.

I agree about that German thing, I'm not exactly sure what that's meant to be.

Regarding the GDP, some of the countries had them listed in the infobox, and now that I have added the GDP to the table, it means we can add up a total GDP for the whole lot to include in the infobox as one figure, and not a list of some of the countries. 89.241.219.79 (talk) 14:34, 24 February 2008 (UTC)