Talk:Italy/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

European Cultures

This terminology sounds very strange to me. What do you mean with European Cultures? At that time there was no europe and cultures and civilazation like Etruscan are better described as Mediterrean rather than european. I suggest to write only cultures (or civilazation) rahter than "european cultures" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pierpaolo.Dondio (talk • contribs) 18:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Culture

I removed "The country is home to the greatest number of UNESCO World Heritage Sites (41)" from the introduction. I moved that to the culture heading. That does not need to be in the introduction. As if it is not long enough already. - Galati 16:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest a text about "Italy, secularisation and religion": http://nagypt.ingyenweb.hu/italy/ITALY.HTM —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zsidlex (talk • contribs) 08:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't agree. In the intro of the countries (any of them, check france for example), you should write 2 or 3 main achievement of the nation. This is oneo f them, so it should be there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.88.101 (talk) 18:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I also don't agree. We should rewrite it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pierpaolo.Dondio (talk • contribs) 18:52, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

ignorance is a bliss

I've been travelling a lot in my life,I've been throughout Europe and lived in many European countries. I've lived in Antwerp Belgium, which is known for its seaPort, the pralines and beer. Antwerp is unfortunatly known for its Extreme right party Vlaams Belang which has the majority. The whole world looked with a certain disgard against flemish people. They were seen as rasist and even fascist. As a foreigner in Belgium I have never experienced any kind of rasism all thou I know that some flemish people feel some frustration with illegal immigration and that they feel a bit invaded by foreign workers coming from North-Africa and Eastern Europe but they "never" aplied any rasism on a local scale. I'm now in Italy and what I experience here is by far much more worst than Belgium or Austria !!! It's seems that a vast majority of the administrative personnel and even the Police are ignorant. They ask belgians, Dutchman, germans and other European Union citizens a passport or a workpermission when you want to be a resident in Italy. When you search for a job in Italy, if you are not an Italian, your curriculum is on the bottomline. It seems that whatever you are, citizen of the European Union or citizen from outside you are threaten as a second class citizen in Italy. Belgians are at least honest when they say that they are rasist but they don't apply it,Italians pretend not to be but they apply it. It's a pitty because I love Italy! so much ignorance ! only one country in the world follows the same pattern as Italy, Japan but at least they com forward and say that they want to be a pure japanese state. In Italy you are only welcome as a foreigner when you are a Tourist our a rich entrepreneur.

Idiotic Vandalism

Just fixed some stupid change of the entire page. Ulyaoth 02:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

It happened again. I fixed it. LupoGrigio146 16:50, 14 December 2006 (not logged in)

Region name

I am Italian and "Lazio" is simply "Lazio". I've never heard the Latin name "Latium" anywhere, and it is confusing put it there because it seems like it was the word actually used by Italians, which is not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.213.166 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

This is the ENGLISH Wikipedia, not the Italian one. While not common as Lazio, Latium is used in English to refer to that specific region. --Fertuno 01:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Even though this is the "ENGLISH" wikipedia, as you so helpfully point out, Lazio is a more accepted term, and far more popular even with English speakers. It would be good to note it, and next time you can leave your attitude at the door. - Izzo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.25.52 (talk • contribs) 04:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Your point above was that Latium is a Latin word, that you never heard that name anywhere, and that is confusing because the word isn't used by Italians. Well, as a matter of fact Latium is also used in English despite you denied it, while not as popular as Lazio exactly as I wrote, and the fact it is not used in Italian is irrelevant on the English Wikipedia. Next time don't try to twist the argument, please. --Fertuno 20:35, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I never left the first point, I always sign my comments. I don't know who left the first point. MY point was that: I. You have a bad attitude that is not welcome on Wikipedia. II. Lazio is a more accepted term both among Italians and English speakers. Those were MY points. -Izzo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.25.52 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I take it you two are both italian? I am english and have lived in england my whole life and have NEVER EVER heard the term 'latium', however i have reguarly heard the term 'lazio' to refer to italians from that area and there are many italians living in this part of london and the only word i've ever heard for them is lazio. Fertuno, if you're going to learn english learn it properly!!!!!! Kjwwww9 12:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Umm, i'm english and the correct term is lazio, fertuno! 84.69.69.207 00:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I've changed it to Lazio. I don't doubt fertuno knows more about italy than i but as a native speaker of english from london i can tell you for certain that Lazio is the correct term. The term 'Latium' is considered archaic in modern english and have never heard it used. I wouldnt go onto the italian wikipedia editing articles against the advice of native italian speakers. I think fertuno should accept he's wrong on this occasion. Kjwwww9 12:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I believe the actual english term is lazio. I look at it this way: wikipedia is a democracy and according to this talk page the favoured term is lazio and fertuno is outnumbered 4-1, therefore i believe it should be left at lazio. The page for lazio was moved from latium to lazio a while back as the result of a landslide vote against the term latium BY ENGLISH SPEAKERS FOR YOUR INFO FERTUNO! The same should apply here, leave it at lazio. Willsamuel 15:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

WP:NOT#DEMOCRACY - Regards, Evv 18:43, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

lol, thanks for that evv i wasnt aware i dont read the policy stuff. However i'm sure the correct term is lazio and considering fertuno's admission on his userpage that he isnt fluent in english he isnt exactly qualified to dictate what the correct name is. I booked a holiday to the region a couple of yeas ago and every travel brochure/agent i went to refered to the term as lazio, if you search for news stories on the region on the BBC for example you will hear the region refered to as lazio. The only time i ever heard latium was when i studied ancient rome at school, so i agree with kjwwww9 about the name being archaic in modern english. I think lazio should stick. Willsamuel 20:44, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

On second thought i've read what evv suggested i read and it does say that consensus may be reached by discussion. That is exactly what we have done we havent literally voted. Out of interest evv what is your opinioun on this: Latium or Lazio? Willsamuel 20:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

lol I was only trying to improve readability in this talk page, but after seeing that comment I just couldn't resist the temptation of linking to WP:NOT :-)

My general perception is that both forms, Latium and Lazio, are fine: both forms are used in English to refer to the modern Italian administrative region — as a simple example, the NGS map Italy, of February 1995, uses "Latium" only, while the BBC uses "Lazio" only.

It is also my general perception that tourism-related material tends to preserve more the local forms than non-touristic publications.

In any case, I think that the issue should be discussed at Talk:Lazio (where it has been raised), and this article should merely use the form under which that other article is (right now, Lazio), for consistency with it. Only if/when that other article is moved to "Latium" should that form be used here too, again, for consistency. - Best regards, Evv 01:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

OK thanks evv. I've checked the main article for the region and it was moved from latium to lazio some time ago, therefore for consistency as you said, the name should be left at lazio. Willsamuel 20:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

So you English speakers never heard the word 'Latium' before. I see. In this case, someone should tell Italian-English dictionary compilers not to use it any more! :) --Erinaceus Italicus 12:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Official Language of Italy?

LANGUAGES
In italy there isn't an official language! it's wrong say that italian is the official language! Francesco Ts! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.56.72.87 (talk • contribs) 19:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

20 December 2006

I've seen it casually mentioned that Italian is the official language of Italy. It seems like an obvious match, certainly, but does anyone have any support for this claim? Credible support would include a statement of Italian as official language on a government website, embassy website, an international organization with Italy as a member, etc. Any ideas, folks? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.247.5.96 (talk • contribs) 16:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Possibly it's just a de facto thing (unless it's in the constitution somewhere). Government and parliamentary business is (presumably) conducted in Italian, statutes are published in Italian etc., etc., so in some sense at least that is the "official" language. David Underdown 16:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Italian is not the official language of Italy. Recently a right-wing party presented a project of law to make it the official language, but there is already opposition to it, both from the right and from the left side of the parliament.

Alex2006 12:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

L'Italiano (Italian) it's the official language of Italy [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.140.16.191 (talk) 11:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC).

Law number 482 (December 15th, 1999) says that "la lingua ufficiale della Repubblica è l'italiano" (the official language of the Republic is Italian) italian laws --Mike Monean 15:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Germanic Invaders??

Wouldn't Germans be more appropriate in the immigration section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.60.106.216 (talk • contribs) 07:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Italy

Is there a Wikiproject Italy? + How many editors regularly contribute to this article? I am interested in the near future to do some work on it, so just curious.. Baristarim 21:59, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there certainly is a Wikipedia:WikiProject Italy, but I'm not certain how active it is. I contribute to this article relatively frequently but not on a regular basis. Since creating the Culture section I've been more busy with reverting vandalism. Sicilianmandolin 03:45, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I will see what I can do. Cheers! Baristarim 04:00, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

The UK

The second paragraph under "Industrialisation, World Wars and Fascism" should read and link to 'The United Kingdom' and not 'Great Britain'. I'd change it myself, but can't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.92.40.49 (talk • contribs) 09:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I have made the changes :) Matchrthom 18:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Dialects

I think that the "language" section is a bit misleading. For example, it says that "sicilianu" (sicilian) is spoken by almost everyone in Sicily, but that's absolutely not true. I am Sicilian and I can barely understand it, let it alone speak it fluently. This is pretty common among middle-class (and above) families, where "speaking in dialect" is generally considered impolite. I cannot vouch for other dialects, of course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.38.93.249 (talk • contribs) 10:41, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

For whatever reason, Ethnologue, which is generally a good source for these things, thinks that almost everyone can speak it. Perhaps you might consider that you can speak it even if you choose not to. In any case, we have to rely on the sources we can find, so generally an article will reflect what others have published, no matter what one's personal experience is. Reverse Gear 10:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Being able to speak it is another thing. Almost everyone, me included, can "imitate" the language simply by modify the inflection and the tone of italian words, however that's not sicilian. I assume that the article talks about the language, complete with vocabulary and constructions. It seems to say that all Sicilians are active speakers of the language, speaking it everyday and in every situation, which is simply not true, despite what Ethonologue may say (I live here). Channels are in italian, newspapers are in italian, school lessons are taught in italian and most educated people speak in italian. I am just pointing this out just in case, I am surely not going to start an edit war for this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.38.93.249 (talk) 11:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC).

I think Ethnologue ignores (or maybee just overlooks) Italian language levels: standard Italian, regional Italian, regional dialect, local dialect, strictly local dialect. It just seems to refer to the middle level, considering Italian dialects as regionally uniform and also giving them the status of language. Unfortunately, that doesn't match the reality at all. :) I think this is the result of an unfounded need for order. More and more people in Italy tend to speak just standard or regional Italian, today.
Of course, personal experience doesn't matter, but good sources simply don't tell the truth! :) --Erinaceus Italicus 23:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Economy

ECONOMY
Italy is ranked as the 8th largest economy in the world in 2006! WROONG! 7TH LARGEST ECONOMY!
Francesco Ts! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.56.72.87 (talk • contribs) 19:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

At one point it reads: "Italy's economy has deceptive strength because it is supported by a substantial "underground" economy that functions outside government controls." What does it mean? The Mafia? Tax evasion? How can this assertion be backed up? (oh, I forget, it's "outside government control".) Wikipedia should be a source of information, not a reinforcement of stereotypes. If indeed the phrase refers to tax evasion, then maybe it should be applied to basically any other democratic/capitalist country with a high GDP where I am certain that it happens (but... well, I can't prove it). But if refers to the mafia instead, oh gosh, then it's even worse... maybe I should just keep quiet. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.18.14.35 (talk) 18:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC).

...And we shoul also add a section about the flying donkeys very common in Italy. They usually feed with pink frogs and some of them even speak with humans. Of course, these tipic Italian animals are outside the government control. --Stefano 19:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it refers to tax evasion, which is translated into Italian as "sommerso" (that is underground). I can't find figures now but tax evasion in Italy is one of the highest amongst 1st world countries. --Fertuno 17:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Fertuno, asking to the unsigned user / Jan, 11 2007: Economy gross product is not supposed to be responsive to taxes (which represent direct revenues and not actually an economy product/output), submerged is a measure to quantify the percentage of not proved (estimable) product per work total output (measurable), even it is agreed that this comes for (and allows) burdens elusion. Have A and X same ability,(1) A produces B and proves B while (2) X produces Y+Z but prefer to avoid prove of Z: in second case the output is two times the first case’s output, but same burdens shown, Y+Z is the output (total wealth) from X, Z is the percentage of submerged of Y+Z; since Z is estimable while Y measurable, Y only is used in statistics (which need comparable and well measurable terms), Countries with submerged show a total Economy Power output to be B+(Y+Z): being Z not proved (and being it not well comparable among Nations, having different characteristics), Economy Gross output is considered to be B+Y only, plus submerged (Z): Countries come to compare per B+Y terms. This is assumed to be submerged Economy: the wealth produced by that part of work not directly measurable. It is studied as the "Matryoshka" System and legal Companies also show that. Mafia, as well as each of the criminal organizations, isn't statistically included, nor even estimated, since totally illegal: this doesn't join Economy output but it's differently measured per different terms and it has a presence, even stronger, in many other high-developed Countries. Lys 19:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

ITALIA

Regarding the reversion of my last edit by Cori:
Vitulia is a Latin word deriving from Vitulus (bull), i.e. the direct translation of ITALIA and ITALOS. It is used by Roman authors (Livy, Virgil) who cite the Greek myth of Hercules and the bull, explaining how Italy was supposed to have got its name. In other words it's got nothing to do with the section. Miskin 15:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Nicknames of Italy

Why somebody cancelled the "Belpaese" nickname of italy? It is used very often, more than "Stivale". Belpaese (=beautiful country) is the real nickname. We should revert to it but i can't... when will be the article unlocked? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.226.1.234 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I restored it. --Fertuno 23:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

SPORT

Why the references about italian basketball have been erased from the culture/sport section ? pallacanestro is the 2nd team sport in Italy and the Lega A1 is in the 3rd or 4th best basketball league of the world.
To not say that the probable 2006-2007 NBA rookie of the year will be Andrea Bargnani and Italy won the silver at Athen2004 ... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.4.104.220 (talk) 12:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

Location maps available for infoboxes of European countries

On the WikiProject Countries talk page, the section Location Maps for European countries had shown new maps created by David Liuzzo, that are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed soon at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish two things:

• whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions),
• which new version (with of without indicating the entire European Union by a separate shade) should be applied for which countries.

Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 19 Feb2007 00:34 (UTC)

Administrative divisions: Provinces

The excerpt: All regions except the Aosta Valley are further subdivided into two or more provinces (provincias).

Hello! I'm Italian. I only want to remind you that the italian for "provinces" is "province" (singular: "provincia") and not "provincias".

Thanks. - Lawks A' Mercy 21:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Population

For the exact amount of italian pop do not read the CIA factbook et similia, but please read the ISTAT web page: http://demo.istat.it/bilmens2006/index_e.html (2006 data)

For metropolitan areas, I suggest this file from OECD [2]

Conte di Cavour 12:49, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Independent Articles on Kingdom of Italy from 1861 to 1946 needed as well as others

Wikipedia articles about France and Germany are divided up each new regime they adopted, like the French First Republic, second republic, empire, etc. to present day France, as well as Imperial Germany, Weimar Germany, etc to present day Germany. The same should be for wikipedia on Italy. I have made changes to the article on the Italian Social Republic to make it more like other articles depicting historical nations, and would greatly appreciate if others could help in completing more pages about Italy such as the Kingdoms of Italy from 1861 to 1946. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by R-41 (talk • contribs) 05:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

• Okay, I've set up an article called Kingdom of Italy (Savoy) to start, if anyone can help, it would be greatly appreciated —Preceding unsigned comment added by R-41 (talk • contribs) 07:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Touristic Informations

I'm glad if you wanna add OpenItaly.NET Collaborative Touristic Portal, that is a free and open resource. Thanks, O-Zone —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.167.125.9 (talk) 10:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

Gramatical Errors

Because I am a new user, I cannot change gramatical errors in this document. If someone else would be so kind as to change the now-spelled 'kilometre' to the word 'kilometer', under the section Population, second paragraph, end of the first sentence. It would be greatly appreciated.

Thank You!! Reckrap 16:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Kilometre is an accepatable (British) spelling of the word. There's no need to change it. We like to think there's a difference between a metre (a unit of length) and a meter, something that measures, e.g. the amount of electricity you have used. David Underdown 16:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I thank you for the explanation of this mistake. I gladly appretiate it. I did not know that there where two different spellings of the word.

Thank You!! Reckrap 12:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

On emigration

On item 2.4 of entry= "ITALY", you should consider that BRAZIL was a major destination for the italian exodus, in a much larger extent than, say, Uruguay, France or Australia. 67.100.183.191 17:45, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Graphiti

I just deleted what some lame-o just wrote: "annika, you'll never figure it out!!!!!! Bryan Maurais rocks!!!!"

Until Later the One and only Reckrap 19:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Italia (Roman province)

Dsm needed because of Italia (Roman province). Maybe {{otheruses}}? --89.172.123.91 17:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually someone turned Italia into a disambiguation page. That was correct and logical, I think. But it is a bit of a pain as it has lots of incoming links, nearly all of which probably intended Italy. (Several people used [[Italia]]n as a shorthand version of [[Italy|Italian]].) —Ian Spackman 08:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Dai ragazzi - Let's go guys

Facciamogli raggiungere la classe A a ques'articolo!!!

This article must reach A-class on the quality scale!!!

Conte di Cavour 14:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

You're doing an excellent job improving this article, Cavour. The Germany article just recently obtained featured status, so let's use the article as a guideline for improving this one. One of the biggest faults I can see with the condition of this article is the lack of references/citations and the occasional POV. Let's fix this and get this article to featured status. Sicilianmandolin 23:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Cough cough :) Turkey or Canada would be a better starting point - Germany article has huge problems. I was present in the FACs of both Turkey and Germany. The history section of Germany is really bad - it is too long. An FA country article would need at least 80 inline citations. Just an advice :) Baristarim 23:50, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Or have a look at other FA country articles if you would like. Again, Germany made FA by chance in a way - that's why there are still edit-wars in that article. Baristarim 23:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Actually, I had already noticed a couple errors in it, including the mention of Mozart as a native of Germany in the Culture section. I replaced his name with Wagner's. :P Sicilianmandolin 11:19, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the compliments :-) Anyway I'm using the UK artcile as a guidline, cause imho it's more "professional".Conte di Cavour 14:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Today I've requested an assisment for this article... Conte di Cavour 15:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, here is my two cents :)

1. certain sections are way too long.
2. Languages section shouldn't even exist, it should be reduced to a paragraph under the Demographics section.
3. Ditto for history. Five subsections is way too much.
4. In the external links section the repetitive use of "Italy" should be avoided, it is obvious that we are talking about Italy :) See [3] (done)
5. There needs to be a "Italy-related topics" template to be listed under the see also. See [4] and [5] (done, but could use some work/additions)
6. Cities should be mentioned under admin divisions, not demographics
7. Geography section should be only one section, with no subsections
8. Religion needs to be cut down to a paragraph and included under demographics
9. I would strongly advise to use Turkey and Canada as references for article structure - not anything else. They are the best country articles on Wiki, and that's the kind of structure and logic that needs to be followed - as is this article is way too long and disorienting in many places, they should only be short summaries and give other specialized articles as "main", and hop, change the subject. UK article is really not good, the general concensus in the FA candidacy pages is that an article shouldn't comport subsections. It is normal, since if an article has subsections, it means that its prose is not good enough to summarize the subject and instead resorts to cutting the flow of the article into creating "compartments" of info - an article should flow..
10. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style - something linked in the section shouldn't be given as a see also, and all seealso, mains, furthers should be the first line of the article and not at the end
11. Notes need to be formatted per WP:CITE
12. There shouldn't be a transport section - it is an encyclopedic article and that information seems too touristy and/or specialized. Do not combine to another section - simply remove it
13. But the first thing is the history section: cut it down to a third of what it is now - the article sounds like History of Italy rather than Italy. Do not use Germany as a reference for this: that article literally sucks in its history section, this was mentioned in its FAC and people said that they were going to work on it but no-one did..

Anyways, just some pointers :) I wish I had more time to get involved with this article but I have so much to do. I also had to restructure Georgia (country).. But I will try to help out as much as I can. Cheers! Baristarim 00:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Valuable pointers you've supplied, indeed. I'll get started very shortly. Sicilianmandolin 04:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Baristarim, thanks a lot for your advices! I concord with you almost in every point, except:

2)Languages...Italy has, like no other country in Europe, a very large number of dialects, that are regularly spoken in italian regions. Those dialects are so different among them, that are out and out languages. A Siciliano speaker has serious difficulty to understand, for example, an Emiliano speaker.

6)I belive that cities and metropolitan areas shoud me mentioned under demographics, because they are simply demographic phenomenons and not administrative subdivisions related things.

12)imho there should be a transport section, because I belive that it's can be useful to comprehend a country's status of developement (there is analogous sections in many articles of european countries).

As for grammar and style: my english is terrible, in fact I limit myself to make tables, add pictures, update datas and accomodate other minor things. If someone can improve the article under the style aspect is absolutely welcome. Conte di Cavour 17:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

The article is in better shape now, but there is still room for improvement. Some sections are still a bit long and need to be expanded in new articles. I find the sentence "Italy is very famous for popular foods like spaghetti, pizza, ice-cream and risotto" to be unworthy of the opening section... perhaps it should go under cuisine or elsewhere. Mariokempes 17:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

This history of Italy forgets a lot of things.

This version of the history of Italy forgets a lot of important things: the medieval Kingdom of Italy (888-1015), the Age of the Condottieri, the battle of Lepanto (where the Italian States played the main role), Francesco Morosini, the great doge of Venice, the name of King Victor Amadeus II, first king of Sardinia, the birth of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies (1734), the resistance of Savoy and Bourbon in Sardinia and in Sicily during the Napoleonic invasion the Humbertinian Age (the colonialism in East Africa until the battle of Adwa), the conquest of Libya, the battles of Cape Matapan, Keren, El Alamein, and Sicily in WWII.

Unification

Should the "Formation - Unification 17 March 1861" be included in the infobox? The 19/20th century Kingdom of Italy has little or nothing to do with the modern Italian republic. Different borders, different government, different laws, etc. All they share is the name and some land. --NEMT 13:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

But Italy born in 1861 when Vittorio Emanuele II become King of Italy

Sports

I've been pretty protective over the Culture section for a while now, but I can't help but notice that my usage of the word "sports" in the paragraph is excessive. Anyone up to the editorial challenge of improving that? Thanks. Sicilianmandolin 03:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

New European vector maps

You're invite to discuss a new series of vector maps to replace those currently used in Country infoboxes: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#New European vector maps. Thanks/wangi 12:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

More graphiti

Someone wrote steve's cool on the intro, so I removed that...I have also noticed that the introduction is quite lengthy!

Climate

Why someone removed the external links to snowfalls and winter photos from the "climate" section because?

* Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). --Beyond silence 01:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Part of the section should be modified, as some cities in the plains of Northern Italy are in the Humid continental climate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humid_continental_climate), CFB, categorization. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.101.126.224 (talk) 00:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Italian origins

Italians are embarassed to admit most of us have genetic links across the Mediterranean to include North Africa and the Near East. There is no reason to be ashamed since most of this link pre-dates the founding of Islam.

"us"? pretending to be of italian origin on the internet to push your racially motivated propoganda (whether you're nordic supremacist or an afro-centric) does not neither make you a) "us", or b) correct.-- SalvoCalcio 23:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow, we are still ddiscussin a small 200 years of Sicilian history (not quite the Italian peninsula). To even say that most Italians have distant Middle Eastern roots is an extreme overstatement. I guess Italians should start claiming their Germanic roots as well.

First of all--I was born in Napoli(Naples) and can trace all of my 8 great-grandparents to within the Campania region, so I am indeed one of "us". Second of all you need to learn the history of the Mediterranean world before making what you believe to be factual statements.--During the Roman Empire period slaves, merchants, solders, etc. came from all over the Empire to the Italian peninsula. Guess what? North Africa and parts of the Middle East were part of that Empire. Didn't you see Gladiator? It is documented by historic records that tens of thousands of slaves where transported from Egypt to Italy during the Empire period. Why do you think some Italians have light brown(olive) skin? This all pre-dates the founding of Islam in the 600's A.D. Even before Rome, how hard do you think it was for people to get into a boat and cross the Mediterranean from North Africa to the Italian peninsula? Did homo sapiens originate in Italy? I don't think so--they came from somewhere else. After Rome there were many Saracen raids onto the peninsula--they just didn't control Sicily. If you look at the architecture along the coast of the entire peninsula you will see Islamic influence. The language was even affected. Foreigners upon hearing the Neapolitan(from Naples) dialect for the first time, think it sounds Arabic. Modern Neapolitan love songs sound that way too. The Arabic word for "the" is "al"--the Italian word is "il". Mediterranean men greet each other with a kiss on the cheek, whether Italian, Greek, Arab, Turkish, Spaniard, etc. Southern Europeans have more in common with other people of both sides of the Mediterranean than with Northern Europeans. Also it's not just southern Italy--Venice did much trade with the Middle East. Many merchants from there came to Venice to live. The Italian last name "Moro" is very common in Venice, and of course the word "moro" means Moor. Jews, Gypsies, Phoenicians, Carthaginians, and other groups also crossed and settled in Italy from the East during the entire period of Italian history. Sicily is just 85 miles from Tunisia--not a very long boat trip. Tunis to Naples takes only an overnight boat ride today. It wouldn't have taken much longer a thousand years ago. I am not ashamed that some of my ancestors are from the south and east side of the Mediterranean, just as I am not proud that some of my ancestors came from north of the Alps. Northern Europeans are not superior to anyone else in the world--so we can stop trying link ourselves with them, and start being ourselves. All of humanity has a mixed past--no one is pure. And even if there were any purity, it wouldn't make them any better.

The Arabic word for "the" is "al"--the Italian word is "il". I do not know anything about the ethnic origins of Italians from different regions of Italy, but Italian article il derives from Latin demonstrative adjective ille, hardly from Arabic. My 2 cents (of Euro), Goochelaar 07:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia article " History of Islam in southern Italy " for further reading.

Using past slavery as means of justifying SOME Italian's dark complexions is baseless. First of all, almost every nation in Europe was under the Roman Empire, basically meaning that these Middle Eastern/North African slaves not only settled the Italian peninsula, but France, Spain, Portugal, Britain, Germany etc. In fact, besides Rome, there were actually no other large cities on the Italian peninsula. Also many slaves that the Romans had were Balkans, Slavic people from Eastern Europe, as well as Germanic peoples from northern Europe as the Roman empire continued to spread. However, there were large Roman cities in France, Spain, Turkey, Britain, and southern Germany. Even before Rome, Italy is just a border skip away from France, Switzerland and Austria, so there is no meaning in Sicily being 85 miles from the coast of Tunisia.

When the Germanic tribes spilled over the Alps and brought Rome to an end, the Arabs raided the peninsula but did not settle it. Instead they captured what history calls "white slaves" off the coasts of Spain and Italy and plundered the coast which as a result, much of the coastal populations fled inlands and in the mountainous regions. There are ancient and historic communities to this day in Calabria, and Sicily that are on high mountainous altitudes. France was subject to Arab raids as well. The Arabs controlled Sicily and the southernmost parts of Italy for 75-200, but the Normans did a crusade on the island ousting Islamic rule and much of it's adherants. For three hundred years, the Normans established it's influence in southern Italy (architecture and people; called: Normanni), which is much more apparent in the architecture along with Byzantine (Greek) Sicily rather than Arab.

The history of Phoenicians and Carthaginians was brief in Italy as they set up trading posts in Sicily, hardly all of Italy. They were not even Arab...they were Punic (who descend from Cypriot tribes). The Arabs were not even present in North Africa during the Carthaginian raids. In 700 AD, when Arab Muslims swept through Northern Africa is when an Arab presence reached Africa. Italians in effect are basically a mixture of Greek (particularily the south), Roman, Italic tribes, Germanic, Frankish, Celtic, Catalan (Spaniard), and Norman peoples, not to mention the tens of thousands of Albanian/Illyrian/Slavic peoples who entered Italy in the Middle Ages and settled Calabria, Sicily, including Basilicata, and Campania, when the Ottomans overran the Balkan peninsula whose communities still exist in Italy and are known as Aberesche. Good read about North African admixture in Europe: http://dienekes.50webs.com/blog/archives/000543.html . To say that universally, every Italian has North African/Middle Eastern is gross overstatement. I dont understand how an Italian person stating that he has Germanic, Celtic, Norman, Albanian, Roman, and Greek distant ancestors is denying his Italianness, considering that all these make up his Italian ancestry. As you rightly put it, it's time to be Italian, so could you follow that as well.

I have been to France, Belgium, Poland, Switzerland, Austria, Croatia, and they greet the same with a hand shake and kiss, so that arguement is baseless. What you have to understand is that there are dark people in every European country as well pastey-white peoples, but we should not use that as a ground for stupid 19th century stereotypes of European peoples. Italians shares things in common with fellow southern Europeans including minor import/export customs with northern Europe and North Africa. No one here is trying to prove which race/ethnicity is better than the other (considering that Europeans, North Africans and Middle Easterners are all Caucasian in race), but it is pointless to bring these outdated arguments of complexion, race, and religion up. You may not be racist, but you are bias in terms of religion considering that you wrote that we should not be ashamed of our heritage because these Arabs were not Muslim yet.

Were not most of the slaves bought and sold brought into the Italian peninsula, and to Rome specifically?--since this was the capital and heart of the Empire? Yes, they didn't all come from North Africa and the Near East, but a large part did. If there were a land bridge between Sicily and Tunisia (actually at one time there was) would you acknowledge gene flow from North Africa? Boats were in use for thousands of years--so why is it so inconcievable that there were migrations from the southern shores of the Mediterranean? Why wouldn't North Africans settle in Italy, as the Normans did? You're so quick to acknowledge gene flow from the north of Italy, but not from the south. In your history book, it seems that migrations only occur in a southerly direction.

If you've ever seen the Duomo(Cathedral) of Amalfi, you would see stark examples of Islamic influence, and this is just one example. I never stated that ALL Italians have ancestry from N. Africa/M. East, but I believe that MOST do have SOME. The port cities of the Italian coast did much commerce with all parts of the Mediterranean, and port cities tend to be the most diverse. Like you said, in the mountains you'll find the more ancient elements of Italian DNA structure. I was born in a large and ancient port city (Naples, as I said) and trace all my ancestors back 4 generations all within Campania. (Going back several hundred or thousand years, none of us can be sure of what we'll find in our family tree). I'm one of those dark Italians with light brown(olive skin) and could easily get confused with being Middle Eastern. I know why some Italians are born with swarthier skin, and why even the ones born with fairer skin have DNA markers for the darker trait. There is even documentation that Sub-Saharan Africans were seen in different periods throughout the Meditteranean world. See Wikipedia article "Sub-Saharan DNA admixture in Europe", also "Emirate of Sicily", and also "History of Islam in southern Italy". Although I find the latter a bit biased, since Muslim inflence extended to Northern Italy as well. Finally, I am not anti-Muslim. While Europe was in the Dark Ages, it was in the Muslim world that the great antiquities in art and literature were preserved. See Wikipedia article "Library of Alexandria". Egypt had the first great Empire, and I proud to acknowledge that going back a couple thousand years that SOME of my ancestors came from there. Let's stop this "North is good, South is bad" mindset. South is good too!

I think that my link to showing NW African (Moorish) admixture in Europe is proof enough that I recognise that there is Northwest African admixture in Italy, but it shows a 2.5% average in Italian persons, compared to 8% in the Portuguese, 5% in Spaniards, and 3.5% in the French. My father is a Calabrian, born to a family of fair skinned, green eyed redheads, in the mountains. His family could easily be mistaken for Irish, Scottish and others. A land bridge...what are you talking about...please tell me you dont base your theories on Neanderthals. Buddy, to this day, Rome is the capital of Italy, but not the largest city in Italy.

Who said that north was better than south. I am Italian, Black, Native, and Scots-Irish definitely not pure anything. But your argument is baseless. If you are willing to acknowledge 2.5% of your roots as Middle Eastern, why wont you accept the Celtic, Germanic, Roman, Italic, Greek, and Norman elements that flow in your blood as well including Catalan which had a strong presence in Napoli where your from. Funny you being from there would not mention stronger Catalan (Spanish) influences. Many slaves were Middle Eastern, but an equally great number were Germanic/Slavic, including many Slavic mercenaries who settled Italy (have you ever watched King Arthur). North Africa and the Middle East was sparse as it was mostly desert, which the Roman empire did not pass the fringes of the Sahara[6]. On the other hand, the slavic speaking areas of Europe were extremely dense and absorbed by the Roman empire. Plus I have already established the fact that North Africa at the time was not Arab, rather they were Berber/Punic.

Italians like every other European population have dark and light populations. When I visited Italy last month, I saw blondes, redheads, brunettes, blacks, I saw pale, and tanned complexion Italians. You see the same differences in Poland, Germany, Britain (many Welsh people have dark complexions), Spain, France etc. Buddy you are confused. Watch some Tv, like C'e Posta per te, or Forum, and look at some real Italians...far from how you describe. The Amalfi cathedral as something to back your argument is week. According to historians, the cathedral is a mixture of Romanesque, Goth, Byzantine, and Arabo-Norman style. Looking at the cathedral it is strikingly Byzantine. Instead of focusing your attention to the future demise of Italy such as a declining population due to ageing, you are focusing yourself on ridiculous arguments.

Please look at the picture at wiki article "Archdiocese of Amalfi-Cava de' Tirreni", and then try to tell me that there is no Islamic inflence there. In fact that would be a nice picture to add to some of the topic articles in question here.

My great-grandfather was born in Amalfi, and it's where my last name originates from.

Are you kidding me? I just wrote that the church was a mixture of Romanesque, Goth, Byzantine, and Arabo-Norman styles. Wow, your running out of reasons buddy. Wow, if you base the existance of some great Islamic contribution to Italy based on a couple churches thats week. I could show you countless Gothic, Romanesque, Norman, Greek, and ancient Roman buildings that bare the testimonies to Italy's history as well.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.147.21 (talk • contribs)

It seems as if the anti-Islamist is you since you won't give them any credit for contributions to Italian DNA and culture. I never said they were the only contributors. They are just the ones that most Italians seem reluctant to acknowledge.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.104.169.201 (talk • contribs)

Buddy, you are the biggest joke ever, but I have to admire your stupidity because you believe it. You distinguish me as anti-Islamic, though it was you who previously wrote: "There is no reason to be ashamed since most of this link pre-dates the founding of Islam." You sound pretty hypocritical to me.

I provide you a link showing NW African (Moorish) admixture in Europe (northern Italians: 1.5%, south-central Italians: 1.3%, Sardinians: 0.3%, and Sicilians: 3.1%) and you still accuse me of denying this though I acknowledge this contribution to the Italian gene pool. Seriously, who cares if Italians are embarrased or ashamed to acknowledge this fraction of their heritage. Did you know that virtually every population in Europe has some sub-saharan admixture: "According to a summary study by Pereira et al. 2005,[3] sub-Saharan mtDNA L haplogroups were found at rates of 0.62% in a German-Danish sample, 1% in the British, 3.83% in Iberians (Portuguese and Spanish), 2.38% in Albanians, 2.86% in Sardinians and 0.94% in Sicilians." Another study saw: "Sub-Saharan African Y-chromosomes are much less common in Europe, for the reasons discussed above. However, Haplogroups E(xE3b) and Haplogroup A spread to Europe due to migrations from Northeast Africa, rather than the slave trade. The haplotypes have been detected in Portugal (3%), Spain (0.42%), Germany (2%), Austria (0.78%), France (2.5% in a very small sample), Italy (0.45%), Sardinia (1.6%) and Greece (0.27%). By contrast, North Africans have about 5% paternal black admixture.[5]" see (sub-saharan DNA admixture in Europe, wikipedia) Yet despite this, no European population readily admits their sub-saharan admixture.

You claim to be Neapolitan. No other group has contributed to your area more besides the indigenous Italic peoples than the Catalans (from Catalonia, Spain). The architecture, the influence on speach and the names of people such as Rodriguez, Perez, etc. is still very apparent, but again this does not reflect the entire 59 million people occyping the peninsula. You see Italians varying from region to region reflect past influences of migrations particularily in it's architecture. So we see influences such as Etruscan, Roman, Greek, Celtic, Germanic, Frankish, Byzantine, Saracen, Slavic, and Gallic influences in Italy but it all depends on where you go. You cant speak for the whole Italian peninsula, just like I cant. While you are proud of your Moorish history, I am proud of Italy's indigenous Romans, who not only influenced the Italian peninsula, but almost every corner of Europe and Western World, something to be more proud of than the meagre contributions of others groups who left minor imprints on the map.

the anon isn't Neapolitan, probably isn't even Italian at all. the nordic and afro-centric racists are easy to spot with their propaganda from a mile off.

apart from the fact that some people use american pop culture movies as an attempt to prove things about Italy (lol), the whole thing really centres around the roman empire... a lot of nordic supremacists are desperately jealous of it and a lot of afro-centrists want to somehow "take credit" for its achievements to civilization, when italians couldn’t give a **** about either sides silly propaganda. its pathetic, but mildly amusing to watch these people try to make out italians are "black".--SalvoCalcio 16:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Apparently you can't read--I was born in Napoli and look very Mediterranean(i.e. black hair, olive skin, etc.). If you're going to brag about DNA contributions from the North, you also have to acknowledge those from the South. I'm a racial realist, NOT a racial idealist or fantasizer. I don't see anything wrong with pigmentation. I myself have light brown skin and wouldn't change a thing about it. I also wouldn't change my straight black hair, Roman nose, and thin lips. Every human being should be fine with the racial traits he or she was born with. Diversity makes the world beautiful. The Mediterranean has been the most diverse region throughout its history--and there's nothing wrong with that! If the reality of history bothers you, then continue to dwell in your racial fantasies and envy of Northern Europeans. I myself will remain glad I was born with Mediterranean features and am neither too dark nor too light(Albino looking). Stop worshiping at the altar of de-pigmentation.

You are a complete nutter....you clearly cant read the links that I have provided for you. Who was bragging about the contributions of the north???. NW African (Moorish) admixture in Europe is proof enough that I recognise that there is Northwest African admixture in Italy, but it shows a 2.5% average in Italian persons, compared to 8% in the Portuguese, 5% in Spaniards, and 3.5% in the French. The whole discussion was based on the realisation that there is minimal southern admixture as well northern admixture; Italians remain influenced wherever foreigners touched whether it be the Saracens, Germanic, Celtic, Norman, Greek, but only in a minor way. Get out of your "brown is better" phase. Realise that you and most of other central, southern Europeans, and even Eastern Europeans have medium complexions, with brown hair, dark eyes...your nothing special (incidently the Portuguese, Spaniards, Italians, French, Croatians, Slovenes, Bosnians, Albanians, Greeks, Poles, Hungarians, Austrians, Belgians, and even Britons can share your features).

You are trying to tell me that some Italians have Middle Eastern/North African ancestry dating from when Carthage attacked the Italian peninsula, and when the Phoenicians arrived in Sicily. I have already established that 1, the Carthaginians were not Middle Eastern, they were Punic, a people who's origins is Cyprus. 2, the Phoenicians never colonised Italy, only founded a city on Sicily, Palermo. So much for your so-called extensive Middle Eastern colonisation of Italy. The only southern influence on Italy I will attest to is the 75 - 200 years of Arab rule in Sicily and southern Puglia, which much of many of the people who settled Sicily were Berber, in which most were ousted during a crusade on the island by the Normans (origins Northern France/Scandinavia). Does you argument matter so much to you...either way Italians are Caucasian. You better just end your ridiculous argument on the genetic makeup of Italians. I think this Wikipedia article clearly states the influences of the Italian people in the Intro-page in an excellent fashion. No one in Italy cares about these ridiculous arguments.

It's ludicrous to believe less pigment makes one better. In my book it makes one worse who cannot take the rays of the sun without fear of getting burnt or skin cancer. Italy is a sunny country, not cloud covered and frigid like gloomy Northern Europe. Pigmentation is good!

I don't think the Romans are indigenous to the Italian peninsula. The Etruscans definately are not.

The Romans are indigenous...they are made up of Italic tribes.

Please remember to sign your posts by typing ~~~~. --Haemo 03:40, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

08:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)08:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)08:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)08:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

French- and German-speaking?

I think it is missleading to categorise Italy as a German- and French-speaking country. Wouldn't it be better to categorise South Tyrol and Aosta valley separately? Aaker 18:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Prime minister?

In Italy there is not Primo ministro (prime minister), but there is PRESIDENTE DEL CONSIGLIO DEI MINISTRI, but the Italians cal him as PRESIDENTE DEL CONSIGLIO.

Italy is well known for its wine and vinyards.

hi

this is tight —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.247.0.142 (talk) 03:16, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Who the @!?$# are you talking @!?$#Matthew Perry SA (talk) 10:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Widespread errors on Wikipedia including this page

This is R-41, I'm a user from London, Ontario, Canada. On my computer at my home and now a computer which I am on at the university I am at, Wikipedia is appearing to have serious problems, multiple images are not appearing. Presently on this article on Italy, I cannot see the flag or coat of arms, or the map on the side table. As well a number of other images are not showing up on the article and they have an "x" or appear blank. However when I click on the blanked or "x"ed off images the images do appear on their own page. Other articles which I have looked at are also having this problem as well. In the past few days, more images are appearing as "x"ed off or blank. When I noticed this problem starting was a few days ago when people started making major changes to templates such as Template:Expert-verify or Template:NPOV as well as others. Also when I try to use the toolbar buttons in the editing toolbar it does not work at all. I'm concerned about this, is anyone else having any of these problems, I'd like to know. Please say "yes" or "no" if you are witnessing similar problems. User:R-41 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 19:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

GDP

Russia and Italy both seem to be the 8th at GDP? --Abuk78 20:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

GDP It is in trillion, not billion!!

There is a gross mistake in the Italian GDP (nominal): it is 2150 trillion, not billion.

The same mistake is not present in GDP (PPP) where the figure is in trillion.

Please change it, otherwise we will look like one of the poorest countries in the world. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.187.5.74 (talk) 15:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

ITALIAN NUCLEAR ARSENAL

italy is, since 1960, a not declared nuclear power because it is under the cover of american strategic forces and it can use, in case of war, american nuclear tactical bombs type B-61 ( 0,3 - 120 kiloton ). Those 90 nuclear weapons are in the Italian Air Force Base Ghedi Torre and Nato Air Base Aviano. Italy is included in "nuclear sharing" of NATO, as Germany, Netherlands and Turkey. It's important that this infrmation will be included in th main topic "Italy", section Armed Forces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.18.136.65 (talk) 10:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I think you'll find that the USA owns those, not Italy. they just happened to be deployed there. Or are you also suggesting that the US army in Iraq are actually Iraqi troops? Rhialto 11:08, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm italian and trust me...the bombs are american, but we can use them in case of war e we can bring the bombs on target with our Tornados. Read the article of Christensen of Natural Defense Council about the american nuclear weapons in Europe. Italy signed "Stone Ax" in 1960 with the US. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.32.193.241 (talk) 20:11, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I made many researches about "Stone Ax", i know what i say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.32.193.241 (talk) 20:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

---

"Mussolini began war on territorial pretext" - I think it's not a pretext, but a real issue of whether economy is intensive or extensive. 77.113.55.226 20:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC)