This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Tha article states at the moment: Magnago was born in
Meran. Various IPs try to change that into Merano. I find that inapposite for the following reasons:
When Magnago was born, Meran was still part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. At those times, Meran had only one single official name, and that was Meran. Merano was only introduced with the Regio decreto nr. 800 in 1923. Therefore, writing Merano in an 1914-context is an anachronism.
Immanuel Kant's birthplace was
Königsberg,
Umberto D'Ancona's was
Fiume, and so on: It seems to be good Wikipedia practice to avoid anachronisms.
Both Meran and Merano are used in English language. Per
WP:NOTBROKEN there is no need for exchanging one name with another.
"Bolzano is the Italian name, Bozen is the German name, Bolzano is the English name; English wikipedia => English name"
"While I am more than happy to call the city Bozen myself, for the English Wikipedia Bolzano is the proper name based on common usage and naming conventions"
"All English language encyclopedia's will refer to Bolzano and all other cities that were formerly German by the name the country they are now part of calls them"
There isn't a single line where it was established that Merano/Bolzano must be called Meran/Bozen before 1923. It's just your personal, subjective opinion. If you think your opinion is correct, then create a new topic in
Talk:Merano and
Talk:Bolzano asking to change the consensus. If you succeed in persuading admins that the consensus needs to be changed, then you're free to edit these articles in that way, but now you're just going against consensus. In order to reply what you wrote here:
At those times, Meran had only one single official name, and that was Meran. Merano was only introduced with the Regio decreto nr. 800 in 1923 are you serious? You instst with this argument, and I keep answering: Italy was officially created in 1981, before it's always been just a clusted of statelets, some of them dominated by Austrians, French, Spanish, etc.... Are you saying that, wherever there's an Italian town name in an article about a previous period than 1981, we should use the name used in that period (Latin, ancient Italian, local dialect, foreign conqueror's language...)? Again: are you serious? Or just incoherent because this is all right just for Merano and Bolzano, or even just for those 2 articles? Please...
Both Meran and Merano are used in English language > "Wikipedia naming convention states to use the most common name in English which is in fact Merano" + "Bozen and Meran are most commonly called Bolzano and Merano in modern English, so we use those" = "What the English speakers do is of course more relevant for the English language Wikipedia, so Merano is the correct solution"
there is no need for exchanging one name with another so why do you keep exchanging ona name with another?
And about your last point: you're right. In Merano Italian speakers are "just" 49,26%, while the "German speaking majority" (sic!) is even 50,27! Crushing. Really. Well, until 1961 Italian speakers were 58,6%... Why don't we change all these town names in the encyclopedia renaming them all "Merano" from 1923 and 1961 and "Meran" before 1923 and after 1961? Not silly at all, not at all... Well, the consensus is Merano, not Meran, even if there's 1,01% of German speakers more than Italian speakers. Period. Again, and I hope for the last time: you're free to go on the talk page and ask for a change. Just a piece of news: the last one who asked for that change, the IP 131.159.0.47 from "Monaco di Baviera" (^^), is still waiting for someone to become aware of his topic after 1 year. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.2.95 (
talk)
19:33, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
One more word, my Italian friend, and I'll erase every single
Fiume I'll find on en.wikipedia ;-) No, sorry, just kidding, I won't, I'm not like you.
Regarding the stuff from the talk pages: Sorry, not interested. You say There isn't a single line where it was established that Merano/Bolzano must be called Meran/Bozen before 1923. I answer: There isn't a single line where it was established that Merano/Bolzano must be called Merano/Bolzano before 1923. In fact, nobody says anywhere anything about that question. If I'm wrong, please correct me.
Yes, I'm serious. And I can easily show you dozens of cases, where Wikipedia avoids anachronistic usage.
Immanuel Kant's was born in
Königsberg,
Umberto D'Ancona's was born in
Fiume,
Constantine XI Palaiologos was born in Constantinople, etc. etc. Are you going to change all these articles, too?
so why do you keep exchanging ona name with another? I'm simply reverting your totally useless contributions. The article Silvius Magnago needs expansion, high quality sources, users with knowledge and linguistic skills. The article certainly doesn't need linguistic cleansing, just because you don't want to be bothered by the name Meran. There is even a special policy, that strongly encourages users not to annoy authors with useless changes. It's called
WP:NOTBROKEN. Mettiti il cuore in pace, there is nothing wrong with using Meran.
About your last point: That is not comparable. The town has two names since World War II, so both of them could be used for that period. Before 1923 it had just one name. That doesn't mean, that Merano could not be used anywhere in pre-1923-contexts (maybe there are cases, where it is justified), but there is certainly no reason to erase the German name everwhere. --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
20:06, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
I've removed your personal attacks (my "nationalist cleansing", "stubborness", "time wasting", etc).
Also the reference to your language center for I had to repeat the same concept isn't a personal attack, at least as my "time wasting" for fusses instead of useful activities...
Sorry, but that's not, how it works. Dear user behind the IPs, why don't you stop with your behaviour? First you changed the sentence with Magnago's birthplace into:
All right. Then let's switch back to the original solution:
Merano. Period. Since you are rejecting any attempt of compromise to use both names. So we'll use just the first one, the more correct, the consensus name. If that's what you prefer, no problem.
The original solution found by my friend and respectful of en.wikipedian consensus, which you keep ignoring, was
Merano/
Meran. Correct because Merano is the most used name in English. Correct because the main article is Merano while Meran is just a redirrect. Correct because in the main article I read "Merano or Meran" not "Meran or Merano". That's why the Merano/Meran solution would have been the best one. But you didn't even accept your very "original solution", Meran/Merano, you had to remove the absolutely correct name Merano. It's you the one who doesn't make compromise and acts against consensus. It's just true. Oh, it's obvious that this behaviour of yours doesn't make you a nationalist, nor an extremist, absolutely not at all, I want this opinion of mine to be clear enough.
No, the original solution was Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano, as
everyone can see. After noticing your heroic "improvements" (
[1],
[2]), I tried to avoid anachronisms and find a line of compromise, by changing one town name to the German (and at those times only official) version and the other town name to the Italian version, but all in vain... --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
13:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Don't pretend you don't understand. Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano was the very first article text, the solution found by my friend to respect the consensus was using first Merano-Bolzano and then Meran-Bozen. It wasn't like your "final solution" (pardon... Freudian lapsus) which consisted in totally removing the Italian name Merano refusing every compromise attempt such as "Meran (today Merano)" and "Merano, which was then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and named Meran". Deny it. Come on. Show me some more mirror-free-climbing.
My solution which implied to use both Merano and Meran (
Merano/
Meran)? Quite strange statement...
I like Meran/Merano. Here in Switzerland we have an analogous case for Biel/Bienne, an originally German speaking town which became bilingual due to the massive immigration of French-speaking workers in the clock industry from the Bernese Jura.
Alex2006 (
talk)
13:52, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
But the page you're talking about is
Biel/Bienne. Whilst the page we're talking about is
Merano not Meran/Merano.
Biel redirects to Biel/Bienne;
Bienne redirects to Biel/Bienne: that's the consensus reached in
Talk:Biel/Bienne.
Meran redirects to Merano, that's the consensus reached in
Talk:Merano. As I've repeated you're all free to go to Merano talk page and make your proposal for a consensus change.
Uffa...
One more word, my Italian friend...
You're free to do it. I'll revert you. Because I'm not like you. I'm not ereasing every single
Meran I'll find on en.wikipedia. Just reverting your wrong edits. The one who did that was the other IP, which isn't me. Anche se non mi credi.
Regarding the stuff from...
What's the problem with your language center? In the talk pages is clearly said that the forms "Merano" and "Bolzano" must be used. You say that it's not true before 1923. Nowhere is written such a thing. There's no need for a line where it's established that "Merano" and "Bolzano" must be called like that before 1923, because it was already been said that "Merano" and "Bolzano" must be called like that, period. Ti faccio un disegnino?
Yes, I'm serious...
Oh my God... I quote from
Königsberg: "This article is about the city before 1945. For after 1945, see Kaliningrad". I quote from
Kaliningrad: "This article is about the city since 1945. For detailed history before 1945, see Königsberg". No comment. You've just given me one more reason to believe I'm right. If you want to use your personal criterion of naming South Tyrol towns, then create a Meran page about the town before 1923 (and maybe after 1961). Otherwise, the consensus is to call it Merano, period. Tu avere capito buono sì?
I'm simply reverting your totally useless...
Why would my contributions be useless and yours useful? If there's no need to change a name, then why do you keep changing it? And you know that Merano and Bolzano are the standard names in en.wikipedia, so your contributions are not only useless but also less constructive than mine. I'm not even interested in finding every single German name of Italian towns in order to change it, maybe just a few, but what I want is to keep an eye on you. And you know why.
About your last point...
Again: I'm not ereasing the German name everywhere, just there, you know, it seems to be so important to you, at least as important as asking an admin to block my previous IP which had never ever had anything to do with you before that one single edit... Now: Merano is the most used name in English, there's a consensus about using Merano instead of Meran, nowhere is written that it must be used Meran before 1923, and everybody is free to ask to change this convention. The way you act is the wrong one. You do exactly what I do, the difference is that I do it towards the preferred form so nobody can contest it. There's no way you're being right in this, da qualunque parte rigiri la frittata, main froint.~
Dear user behind the plethora of IPs: It's very simple. Please show me a piece of
policy or guideline, which states, that it is forbidden to use Meran in a 1914-context. If you can't show me anything like that, the discussion is closed. You failed to make any useful contribution here. What follows, is a complete list of your edits:
1st edit: useless change from German-Italian town names to Italian-German town names
2nd edit: useless change from German-Italian town names to Italian-German town names
Oh my God! If you're an intelligent person in full possession of his mental faculties (and I have no doubts you are) why are you making me repeat the same things every time you reply? Now follow this reasoning, step by step:
In
Talk:Merano it's said: "Wikipedia naming convention states to use the most common name in English which is in fact Merano" "Bozen and Meran are most commonly called Bolzano and Merano in modern English, so we use those" "What the English speakers do is of course more relevant for the English language Wikipedia, so Merano is the correct solution". It's all right so far? Have you understood that these sentences are taken from there? Do you want to control by yourself I'm saying the truth? Well. Next step...
The meaning of those sentences is that the name Merano must be preferred to Meran in this English encyclopedia. Do you agree with that? I don't mean wether you agree with the sentences or not, but wether you agree that the meaning of the senences is that or not. So, do you agree? If you do, it means that: you agree it's correct to use Merano instead of Meran (even if not always strongly necessary) while it's uncorrect or at least very inadvisable to change the name Merano to Meran; and that this conventions is valid "always". A-L-W-A-Y-S. Because, if this convention wasn't always valid, we should have read something like "Merano is the correct name to use in an English Wiki BUT not before 1923" or "EXCEPT for the 1914-period" or "ONLY after its name (already in use) became the offical name". So, do you agree with that meaning of the sentences is that or not?
As the meaning of the sentences from the talk page IS that, your changing the name from Merano to Meran, and even removing the correct Merano from the 2 names solution, is wrong. Your behaviour is WRONG. Have you understood that? If you haven't, please restart reading from the beginning until you understand.
Since I'm not like you, I've always told you that this hasn't to be perforce the only solution: you can go to
Talk:Merano and make a proposal, such as creating 2 different pages, Merano and Meran, or to establish that the name Merano can only be used in a post-1945-context, even if this encyclopedia was created for XXI century English-speaking people who mostly know the town as Merano, or to invert the consensus and call the town Meran because there's 1,01% more German speakers than Italian speakers, you're free to do it. But until that moment, until you reach a new consensus, en.wikipedia consensus which you keep ignoring (and I don't know how many times I've said that) establishes that the name used must be Merano. "Merano is the correct solution". Period.
Before dismantling your house of cards, let me ask you a question: why don't you and your admin friends make a consensus change request in
Talk:Merano, where it's ESTABLISHED that the name we must use is "Merano" and no Wikipedian's mere opinion can go against such a consensus??? Answer me, please. This is the... 5th? 8th? 12th? I don't remember how many times I've already asked you. Maybe this time I'll be luck and shall receive an answer.
Mhm, and since I've been dismantling myself, a semi-protection of the page has come into affect, in order to stop your edit warring with a plethora of IPs... The difference between Fiume and Meran is, that Fiume isn't called Fiume anymore, while Meran is still one of the town's official names. The wording Born in Merano (back then still named Meran and part of Austria-Hungary) would imply to readers, that the town isn't called Meran anymore, which is factually wrong. Still no policy in sight which forbids the usage of Meran in 1914-contexts? --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
13:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Still no policy in sight which forbids the usage of Merano in 1914-contexts?
(id est: te l'ho detto, gira che ti rigira sempre lì s'arriva, non c'è modo che tu possa aver ragione a sostituire Merano con Meran, fine)
No, certainly not. Neither Meran nor Merano are forbidden. The current text says Meran. I find that reasonable in an 1914-context, Alex finds that reasonable in an 1914-context, you're the only one here, who doesn't find that reasonable. Since you can't cite any policy giving weight to your argumentation, that means, that you don't have a mandate to change the article text unilaterally. Case closed. --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
16:41, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Why can't you say just once something fully true? Why must you always either tell lies or half truths? Why do you keep using the "2 weights-2 measures" method? You find that reasonable in a 1914-context, Alex finds "Meran/Merano" reasonable in a 1914-context, WCM found the direct link (Merano) reasonable in a 1914-context. So far you continued repeating that there's no policy which forbids the usage of "Meran" in 1914-context, while I told you that there's no policy which forbids the usage of "Merano" in 1914-context, because I don't want necessarily to delete the name "Meran", just inserting "Merano" and link it instead of the other one. It's you refusing one of the names, not me. And that obviously isn't far likely to a nationalist behaviour. You removed today pieces of my messages but, when I dared to do the same to you, you threatened me. You link only those pieces of revisions giving you reason, ignoring that all my following answer, so that the one who watches your links can have just a partial opinion of facts, without the chance to listen to the other side. I've always invited you to make a proposal in Merano talk page, but you didn't answer even once. Instead, you asked for a 3rd opinion. Well, my friend's opinion is one opinion. I'll tell him to come when he has time. He'll be happy of that, since it was him who made the very first edit. I told you I would keep an eye on you, you've wasted these days after this, but it was your choice.
A little remark from my side:
For long standing consensus (this is the nth time with n>10 which I observe these silly nationalistic disputes) and according to
WP:COMMONNAME, Merano and Bolzano are the names commonly used at enwiki for this two cities in South-Tyrol;
Since here we refer to a time prior to 1919, the name "Meran" is in this case appropriate.
Personally I am still for keeping the status-quo, mainly because the German majority is weak, the usage of the two forms is almost 50 - 50 and the two forms practically coincide. Meran/-o is really a "Grenzfall". :-) Last but not least, this modus vivendi has worked fairly well until now. I know, what I am writing is not very encyclopedic, but in my job area we say "Never touch the running system" :-), and I think that - provided that one can find the necessary consensus (and I strongly doubt it, since all the Italian nationalists would be against it) - the price that we should pay for this move would be an increase in edit warring. Cheers,
Alex2006 (
talk)
10:22, 30 November 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Robert McClenon: Thanks for your interest. The article states at the moment: Magnago was born in
Meran. Various IPs try to change that into Merano. I find that inapposite for the following reasons:
When Magnago was born, Meran was still part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. At those times, Meran had only one single official name, and that was Meran. The name Merano was only introduced in 1923. Therefore, writing Merano in an 1914-context is an anachronism.
Immanuel Kant's birthplace was
Königsberg,
Umberto D'Ancona's was
Fiume, and so on: It seems to be good Wikipedia practice to avoid anachronisms.
Nowadays, both Meran and Merano are official and both are used in English language. Per
WP:NOTBROKEN there is no need for exchanging one name with another.
Generally, I find the IPs' behaviour tremendously unreasonable, since their one and only interest consists in the naming dispute, brought forward with continued edit warring that made a semi-protection of the page necessary. --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
16:14, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
How many editors are involved in this dispute, anyway? I see two named editors and an IP. Is one of the named editors also editing logged out, or is this a dispute between three editors?
Robert McClenon (
talk)
16:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
It is mainly a dispute between me and an editor using a plethora of IPs (
here you can find a list of some of the involved IPs,
here a full list of the IPs' "contribution" to the article). --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
16:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Robert McClenon: The question is: have we got to use the consensus name (
Merano) or the other one (
Meran)? My opinion is to use the consensus name, which is the most common in English (this is an English encyclopedia). The user who made the requests is German-speaking and wants to use Meran. He argues that the Italian name mustn't be used because in that year Merano was not yet the official name although already used. I replied that: in
Talk:Merano was established to use Merano, not to use Merano only after it became the official name of the town; if we do what he wants, this would mean changing all Italian towns names according to the period they're referred to, because Italy was born in 1861 and before that year the official languages were a lot, from Latin to dialects, from ancient Italian to foreign conquerors' languages; he can make a request for a consensus change in Merano talk page, but he kept ignoring it, saying that there's written nowhere that Meran can't be used for that period, in fact it's just written that Merano must be used in place of Meran, nowhere is written that there's an exception for such period; I proposed to use both names, as it's already being done for other towns in en.wikipedia, but he refused and removed the Italian name which was next to the German name. That's all. Consensus version of the encyclopedia vs. secondary name in the encyclopedia. To answer your last question, the editors are Mai-Sachme and me (my IP always starts with 151.20.0-1-2-3), but the first edit was done by a friend of mine, and if you like I can ask him to come here discussing too.
Mai-Sachme had moved your comment after noclador's answer so that it looked like you answered him instead of me. This would make you all understand whom you're dealing with. The same person who modifies other people's comments and threatens the author when he dares to do the same with him.
Let me chip in here: I assume I am the only editor actually from Meran/Merano... there is a consensus on wikipedia to use a city's name as it was used when a person was born: hence
Rudyard Kipling was born in Bombay, as was
Salman Rushdie and
Zubin Mehta. Bombay was renamed in 1995 to
Mumbai, but the consensus is to keep Bombay for the people born before that. Same goes for Beijing. Sometimes people put (now named xyz) behind the old name. In that context I suggest to stick with Meran for the Magnago article.
noclador (
talk)
17:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
The original text was Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano, against consensus. The first solution has been Merano/Meran and Bolzano/Bozen. About the irony you keep doing about my edits, I could have told you already but I've been waited for the best chance to arrive: you really like being clap-clapped for your great contributions which took you God only knows how long time, you're such an extraordinary contributor, Wiki would be nothing without you, we all should bow down to you! The only thing you've always avoided is finding a line of comprimise: it was you who removed the Italian name, I just put the German one after. I've repeated you about 17 times that the consensus just says to use Merano instead of Meran, without mentioning any exception for your beloved 1914-context, because it's the most used name in English, but all in vain... I've also repeated that thing about Italian town names used in the past to show the paradox of your statement, but all in vain... And, for the 18th time, it's not "for guys like me" but "for Wikipedian CONSENSUNS" that is the wrong name to be used in this encyclopedia, I've tried using them both and you removed the Italian one (
as I said yesterday, you're not the only one able to use links). But as I can see below there's no really need for further comments... XXX — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.3.141 (
talk •
contribs)
08:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
The IP editor was correct in this case, we don't link articles by the redirect as that increases server workload needlessly. When Mai-Sachme broke 3RR, I suggested that the article be protected as it seemed both editors were headed for a block. Semi-protection seems a bad idea. See what you think of my compromise suggestion. WCMemail 23:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC) PS nice to see you
Noclador long time no see. WCMemail23:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Thank you WCM! The most important thing is to use the name Merano and link directly to the article. I was ready to accept also a compromise such as "...Meran (
Merano)..." but your solution is good. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.3.141 (
talk •
contribs)
08:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Regarding your compromise suggestion: I already explained that a couple of times here on this talk page: This kind of wording implies to readers that the town isnt'called Meran or not known by this name anymore. My point being: Meran is still one of the two official names. In fact, it's likely that English native speakers are even
more familiar with Meran. Considering these facts, a wording, which suggests that Meran is "now known as Merano" seems quite odd and mistakable to me. If server workload is really an issue, that problem
should be solved now. --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
23:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Actually if you want a truly independent 3rd opinion, you're both coming across as talking nationalist bollocks. If there are two official names, then we should simply mention them both. You have any objection to the dual name approach suggested by yourself above? WCMemail23:40, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Let me rewrite a few quotes I took from
Talk:Merano he "forgot" to mention:
"Wikipedia naming convention states to use the most common name in English which is in fact Merano"
"Bozen and Meran are most commonly called Bolzano and Merano in modern English, so we use those"
"What the English speakers do is of course more relevant for the English language Wikipedia, so Merano is the correct solution"
Same for Bolzano. You can read them at the top of the page and in the related talk page. I've told him several times: that's the consensus, his opinion isn't more relevant than Wikipedian admins' conventions established years ago, he could go to the talk page and make a proposal for a change. Everything entered an ear just to exit the other one. But at least (and at last!) you've come and resolved it. If we had to choose just 1 name from 2, it would be Merano, no doubts. Using both names would imply that the consensus name should come before the secondary name. Since he deleted the Italian name in favour of the German one, the ultimate solution was to use only the consensus name, Merano, but I agree with your proposal of 2 names and 1 link to
Merano. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.3.141 (
talk •
contribs)
08:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Tsk tsk tsk... It's not
Meran/Merano but
Meran/Merano (it takes a little, don't worry if you don't get it at once). I'm sooo-rry for your dear "WP:NOTBROKEN" or whatever. And, more important, your attempt to totally remove the Italian name refusing any compromise has failed (what a pity, to quote you)! Now you can restart living your life out of here and also go back to edit other pages (which I'll be keeping an eye on, don't you forget, Wu...pardon, Woody!)
C'mon, Woody: I know you're raged because you've, on your certainly sane point of view, "lost", but just wait, it will pass, you'll return back to your previous happiness, just have patience. And, since you didn't understand (but by now I'm not surprised any more), my "friend's" goal was to put Merano before Meran, I was interested to link to Merano instead of Meran, as I've written this morning in my first reply to WCM and tried proposing when adding Merano to Meran instead of substituting it. But I have to thank you for your being so explicit in your real intentions, in the mentality behind your actions, at least now Wikipedians know who really is the "good boy" Mai-Sachme, and this discussion shall remain here forever...
I was interested to link to Merano instead of Meran... No, you weren't.
That was your imaginary friend. And
that was you, as you
told me personally :-). Your start into the edit war wasn't a removal of the link
Meran, your childish goal was to put Merano in front of Meran. And you finally failed.
Nah. You know what you're saying is false. I can prove it. But I want to give you a chance: say it yourself. If you say that you were lying, it'll be over. But if you repeat what you've been saying since this morning, or even if you don't reply at all, I'll do it for you. I'll show everyone you were wrong and just trying getting me angry. Anyhow, the truth shall be said, either by me or by yourself. I'll be waiting... — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.0.53 (
talk)
12:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Worse than I thought... You wrote a reply and deleted it after 2 minutes! Well, before keeping my promise, let me quote it:
No, you just got caught lying. You're claiming now that your only intention was to remove the link
Meran. Brief reality check: The best choice would have been leaving the consensus name only, Merano, but it was all right to use them both, remember it was you who removed one of them, not me...
It's laughable, that you claim a "victory" now. The entire story here is just sad. If there was a "victory", then by idiocy over common sense. Endless discussions, and at the end of the story the article text states that Magnago was born in Meran/Merano. Exactly the wording
you battled against at the beginning, exactly the wording
I restored after some trolling! And no, the revision history doesn't lie. In fact it doesn't. You do. And now... Finally I can unmask the "good boy" Mai-Sachme!
If I really wanted to put Merano before Meran... HOW do you explain this edit??? Uh-oh... I see a "Meran" before "Merano"... And wait, "Merano" is closed between parenthesis?! Mumble mumble mumble... Maybe ("maybe", not of course, huh!) does this mean that... My goal wasn't to put Merano before Meran, but something different? Such as... Linking directly to Merano? And maybe the name Merano before Meran was a valid option as long as Meran had the link too but it lost its importance when there were no more links to Meran? Or maybe I'm wrong, you have a better explanation for
that... You, the one who removed the Italian name but was finally forced to accept it in the text and also to link directly to Merano instead of Meran. You, who still pretend you don't know the difference between
Meran/
Merano and
Meran/Merano. You, the only one who spoke about "victory". I've never. This shows up your mentality. You threw your mask off. After I had thanked WCM, you started trying getting me angry transforming the "Third opinion" section into a "Let's talk about how WCM's solution is my enemy's defeat". Then you rushed around the Wiki looking for a way you could take at least a little revenge on me appealing to admins. All in all... Well, I won't spoke about victory, but you actually lost twice: both in your "kampf" for Germanity in Italy and in hiding your true self. Thank you so much! And don't forget that... I'll be always taking an eye on you! XXX — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.0.53 (
talk)
14:01, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
And yes, I reverted those edits. I'm a regular contributor in the area of
South Tyrol and quite used to revert nationalistic bollocks (no matter if coming from the
German or
Italian side). If I see an (excuse my French) imbecile edit
like this one or
that one, I'm not going to let that pass. For obvious reasons, I think... --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
23:51, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Wee Curry Monster: although I am Italian :-), I agree with Mai-Sachme here. Using "Merano" as the birth place of Magnago is an anachronism. Taking a much more important example, at Wikipedia we use "Constantinople" to define Istanbul in contexts prior to the 1920s, since this was the current name used by English sources during that period. The same should apply for Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano.
Alex2006 (
talk)
05:37, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Guys, I don't have a dog in the fight, so really don't care what the article says. My point was that directing to the subsidiary article via a redirect was bad practice.
If I may make an observation, something learned from bitter personal experience, don't keep replying to "nationalist bollocks", just ignore it and let them rant on themselves. Let them have the
WP:LASTWORD. If you keep replying, it looks to an outsider looking in as if you're just as bad. WCMemail12:50, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Next Steps
I see that at least two editors are engaged in a hostile exchange. A
third opinion was requested, but I think that no one really wants consensus; they just want to quarrel. What should be done next? You can go to
the dispute resolution noticeboard, but I wouldn't recommend it, because there is so much hostility that discussion will fail. I suggest the use of a
Request for Comments, which is binding. Otherwise, take this to
WP:ANI and see whether anyone gets blocked or topic-banned.
Robert McClenon (
talk)
16:04, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Tha article states at the moment: Magnago was born in
Meran. Various IPs try to change that into Merano. I find that inapposite for the following reasons:
When Magnago was born, Meran was still part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. At those times, Meran had only one single official name, and that was Meran. Merano was only introduced with the Regio decreto nr. 800 in 1923. Therefore, writing Merano in an 1914-context is an anachronism.
Immanuel Kant's birthplace was
Königsberg,
Umberto D'Ancona's was
Fiume, and so on: It seems to be good Wikipedia practice to avoid anachronisms.
Both Meran and Merano are used in English language. Per
WP:NOTBROKEN there is no need for exchanging one name with another.
"Bolzano is the Italian name, Bozen is the German name, Bolzano is the English name; English wikipedia => English name"
"While I am more than happy to call the city Bozen myself, for the English Wikipedia Bolzano is the proper name based on common usage and naming conventions"
"All English language encyclopedia's will refer to Bolzano and all other cities that were formerly German by the name the country they are now part of calls them"
There isn't a single line where it was established that Merano/Bolzano must be called Meran/Bozen before 1923. It's just your personal, subjective opinion. If you think your opinion is correct, then create a new topic in
Talk:Merano and
Talk:Bolzano asking to change the consensus. If you succeed in persuading admins that the consensus needs to be changed, then you're free to edit these articles in that way, but now you're just going against consensus. In order to reply what you wrote here:
At those times, Meran had only one single official name, and that was Meran. Merano was only introduced with the Regio decreto nr. 800 in 1923 are you serious? You instst with this argument, and I keep answering: Italy was officially created in 1981, before it's always been just a clusted of statelets, some of them dominated by Austrians, French, Spanish, etc.... Are you saying that, wherever there's an Italian town name in an article about a previous period than 1981, we should use the name used in that period (Latin, ancient Italian, local dialect, foreign conqueror's language...)? Again: are you serious? Or just incoherent because this is all right just for Merano and Bolzano, or even just for those 2 articles? Please...
Both Meran and Merano are used in English language > "Wikipedia naming convention states to use the most common name in English which is in fact Merano" + "Bozen and Meran are most commonly called Bolzano and Merano in modern English, so we use those" = "What the English speakers do is of course more relevant for the English language Wikipedia, so Merano is the correct solution"
there is no need for exchanging one name with another so why do you keep exchanging ona name with another?
And about your last point: you're right. In Merano Italian speakers are "just" 49,26%, while the "German speaking majority" (sic!) is even 50,27! Crushing. Really. Well, until 1961 Italian speakers were 58,6%... Why don't we change all these town names in the encyclopedia renaming them all "Merano" from 1923 and 1961 and "Meran" before 1923 and after 1961? Not silly at all, not at all... Well, the consensus is Merano, not Meran, even if there's 1,01% of German speakers more than Italian speakers. Period. Again, and I hope for the last time: you're free to go on the talk page and ask for a change. Just a piece of news: the last one who asked for that change, the IP 131.159.0.47 from "Monaco di Baviera" (^^), is still waiting for someone to become aware of his topic after 1 year. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.2.95 (
talk)
19:33, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
One more word, my Italian friend, and I'll erase every single
Fiume I'll find on en.wikipedia ;-) No, sorry, just kidding, I won't, I'm not like you.
Regarding the stuff from the talk pages: Sorry, not interested. You say There isn't a single line where it was established that Merano/Bolzano must be called Meran/Bozen before 1923. I answer: There isn't a single line where it was established that Merano/Bolzano must be called Merano/Bolzano before 1923. In fact, nobody says anywhere anything about that question. If I'm wrong, please correct me.
Yes, I'm serious. And I can easily show you dozens of cases, where Wikipedia avoids anachronistic usage.
Immanuel Kant's was born in
Königsberg,
Umberto D'Ancona's was born in
Fiume,
Constantine XI Palaiologos was born in Constantinople, etc. etc. Are you going to change all these articles, too?
so why do you keep exchanging ona name with another? I'm simply reverting your totally useless contributions. The article Silvius Magnago needs expansion, high quality sources, users with knowledge and linguistic skills. The article certainly doesn't need linguistic cleansing, just because you don't want to be bothered by the name Meran. There is even a special policy, that strongly encourages users not to annoy authors with useless changes. It's called
WP:NOTBROKEN. Mettiti il cuore in pace, there is nothing wrong with using Meran.
About your last point: That is not comparable. The town has two names since World War II, so both of them could be used for that period. Before 1923 it had just one name. That doesn't mean, that Merano could not be used anywhere in pre-1923-contexts (maybe there are cases, where it is justified), but there is certainly no reason to erase the German name everwhere. --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
20:06, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
I've removed your personal attacks (my "nationalist cleansing", "stubborness", "time wasting", etc).
Also the reference to your language center for I had to repeat the same concept isn't a personal attack, at least as my "time wasting" for fusses instead of useful activities...
Sorry, but that's not, how it works. Dear user behind the IPs, why don't you stop with your behaviour? First you changed the sentence with Magnago's birthplace into:
All right. Then let's switch back to the original solution:
Merano. Period. Since you are rejecting any attempt of compromise to use both names. So we'll use just the first one, the more correct, the consensus name. If that's what you prefer, no problem.
The original solution found by my friend and respectful of en.wikipedian consensus, which you keep ignoring, was
Merano/
Meran. Correct because Merano is the most used name in English. Correct because the main article is Merano while Meran is just a redirrect. Correct because in the main article I read "Merano or Meran" not "Meran or Merano". That's why the Merano/Meran solution would have been the best one. But you didn't even accept your very "original solution", Meran/Merano, you had to remove the absolutely correct name Merano. It's you the one who doesn't make compromise and acts against consensus. It's just true. Oh, it's obvious that this behaviour of yours doesn't make you a nationalist, nor an extremist, absolutely not at all, I want this opinion of mine to be clear enough.
No, the original solution was Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano, as
everyone can see. After noticing your heroic "improvements" (
[1],
[2]), I tried to avoid anachronisms and find a line of compromise, by changing one town name to the German (and at those times only official) version and the other town name to the Italian version, but all in vain... --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
13:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Don't pretend you don't understand. Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano was the very first article text, the solution found by my friend to respect the consensus was using first Merano-Bolzano and then Meran-Bozen. It wasn't like your "final solution" (pardon... Freudian lapsus) which consisted in totally removing the Italian name Merano refusing every compromise attempt such as "Meran (today Merano)" and "Merano, which was then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and named Meran". Deny it. Come on. Show me some more mirror-free-climbing.
My solution which implied to use both Merano and Meran (
Merano/
Meran)? Quite strange statement...
I like Meran/Merano. Here in Switzerland we have an analogous case for Biel/Bienne, an originally German speaking town which became bilingual due to the massive immigration of French-speaking workers in the clock industry from the Bernese Jura.
Alex2006 (
talk)
13:52, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
But the page you're talking about is
Biel/Bienne. Whilst the page we're talking about is
Merano not Meran/Merano.
Biel redirects to Biel/Bienne;
Bienne redirects to Biel/Bienne: that's the consensus reached in
Talk:Biel/Bienne.
Meran redirects to Merano, that's the consensus reached in
Talk:Merano. As I've repeated you're all free to go to Merano talk page and make your proposal for a consensus change.
Uffa...
One more word, my Italian friend...
You're free to do it. I'll revert you. Because I'm not like you. I'm not ereasing every single
Meran I'll find on en.wikipedia. Just reverting your wrong edits. The one who did that was the other IP, which isn't me. Anche se non mi credi.
Regarding the stuff from...
What's the problem with your language center? In the talk pages is clearly said that the forms "Merano" and "Bolzano" must be used. You say that it's not true before 1923. Nowhere is written such a thing. There's no need for a line where it's established that "Merano" and "Bolzano" must be called like that before 1923, because it was already been said that "Merano" and "Bolzano" must be called like that, period. Ti faccio un disegnino?
Yes, I'm serious...
Oh my God... I quote from
Königsberg: "This article is about the city before 1945. For after 1945, see Kaliningrad". I quote from
Kaliningrad: "This article is about the city since 1945. For detailed history before 1945, see Königsberg". No comment. You've just given me one more reason to believe I'm right. If you want to use your personal criterion of naming South Tyrol towns, then create a Meran page about the town before 1923 (and maybe after 1961). Otherwise, the consensus is to call it Merano, period. Tu avere capito buono sì?
I'm simply reverting your totally useless...
Why would my contributions be useless and yours useful? If there's no need to change a name, then why do you keep changing it? And you know that Merano and Bolzano are the standard names in en.wikipedia, so your contributions are not only useless but also less constructive than mine. I'm not even interested in finding every single German name of Italian towns in order to change it, maybe just a few, but what I want is to keep an eye on you. And you know why.
About your last point...
Again: I'm not ereasing the German name everywhere, just there, you know, it seems to be so important to you, at least as important as asking an admin to block my previous IP which had never ever had anything to do with you before that one single edit... Now: Merano is the most used name in English, there's a consensus about using Merano instead of Meran, nowhere is written that it must be used Meran before 1923, and everybody is free to ask to change this convention. The way you act is the wrong one. You do exactly what I do, the difference is that I do it towards the preferred form so nobody can contest it. There's no way you're being right in this, da qualunque parte rigiri la frittata, main froint.~
Dear user behind the plethora of IPs: It's very simple. Please show me a piece of
policy or guideline, which states, that it is forbidden to use Meran in a 1914-context. If you can't show me anything like that, the discussion is closed. You failed to make any useful contribution here. What follows, is a complete list of your edits:
1st edit: useless change from German-Italian town names to Italian-German town names
2nd edit: useless change from German-Italian town names to Italian-German town names
Oh my God! If you're an intelligent person in full possession of his mental faculties (and I have no doubts you are) why are you making me repeat the same things every time you reply? Now follow this reasoning, step by step:
In
Talk:Merano it's said: "Wikipedia naming convention states to use the most common name in English which is in fact Merano" "Bozen and Meran are most commonly called Bolzano and Merano in modern English, so we use those" "What the English speakers do is of course more relevant for the English language Wikipedia, so Merano is the correct solution". It's all right so far? Have you understood that these sentences are taken from there? Do you want to control by yourself I'm saying the truth? Well. Next step...
The meaning of those sentences is that the name Merano must be preferred to Meran in this English encyclopedia. Do you agree with that? I don't mean wether you agree with the sentences or not, but wether you agree that the meaning of the senences is that or not. So, do you agree? If you do, it means that: you agree it's correct to use Merano instead of Meran (even if not always strongly necessary) while it's uncorrect or at least very inadvisable to change the name Merano to Meran; and that this conventions is valid "always". A-L-W-A-Y-S. Because, if this convention wasn't always valid, we should have read something like "Merano is the correct name to use in an English Wiki BUT not before 1923" or "EXCEPT for the 1914-period" or "ONLY after its name (already in use) became the offical name". So, do you agree with that meaning of the sentences is that or not?
As the meaning of the sentences from the talk page IS that, your changing the name from Merano to Meran, and even removing the correct Merano from the 2 names solution, is wrong. Your behaviour is WRONG. Have you understood that? If you haven't, please restart reading from the beginning until you understand.
Since I'm not like you, I've always told you that this hasn't to be perforce the only solution: you can go to
Talk:Merano and make a proposal, such as creating 2 different pages, Merano and Meran, or to establish that the name Merano can only be used in a post-1945-context, even if this encyclopedia was created for XXI century English-speaking people who mostly know the town as Merano, or to invert the consensus and call the town Meran because there's 1,01% more German speakers than Italian speakers, you're free to do it. But until that moment, until you reach a new consensus, en.wikipedia consensus which you keep ignoring (and I don't know how many times I've said that) establishes that the name used must be Merano. "Merano is the correct solution". Period.
Before dismantling your house of cards, let me ask you a question: why don't you and your admin friends make a consensus change request in
Talk:Merano, where it's ESTABLISHED that the name we must use is "Merano" and no Wikipedian's mere opinion can go against such a consensus??? Answer me, please. This is the... 5th? 8th? 12th? I don't remember how many times I've already asked you. Maybe this time I'll be luck and shall receive an answer.
Mhm, and since I've been dismantling myself, a semi-protection of the page has come into affect, in order to stop your edit warring with a plethora of IPs... The difference between Fiume and Meran is, that Fiume isn't called Fiume anymore, while Meran is still one of the town's official names. The wording Born in Merano (back then still named Meran and part of Austria-Hungary) would imply to readers, that the town isn't called Meran anymore, which is factually wrong. Still no policy in sight which forbids the usage of Meran in 1914-contexts? --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
13:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Still no policy in sight which forbids the usage of Merano in 1914-contexts?
(id est: te l'ho detto, gira che ti rigira sempre lì s'arriva, non c'è modo che tu possa aver ragione a sostituire Merano con Meran, fine)
No, certainly not. Neither Meran nor Merano are forbidden. The current text says Meran. I find that reasonable in an 1914-context, Alex finds that reasonable in an 1914-context, you're the only one here, who doesn't find that reasonable. Since you can't cite any policy giving weight to your argumentation, that means, that you don't have a mandate to change the article text unilaterally. Case closed. --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
16:41, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Why can't you say just once something fully true? Why must you always either tell lies or half truths? Why do you keep using the "2 weights-2 measures" method? You find that reasonable in a 1914-context, Alex finds "Meran/Merano" reasonable in a 1914-context, WCM found the direct link (Merano) reasonable in a 1914-context. So far you continued repeating that there's no policy which forbids the usage of "Meran" in 1914-context, while I told you that there's no policy which forbids the usage of "Merano" in 1914-context, because I don't want necessarily to delete the name "Meran", just inserting "Merano" and link it instead of the other one. It's you refusing one of the names, not me. And that obviously isn't far likely to a nationalist behaviour. You removed today pieces of my messages but, when I dared to do the same to you, you threatened me. You link only those pieces of revisions giving you reason, ignoring that all my following answer, so that the one who watches your links can have just a partial opinion of facts, without the chance to listen to the other side. I've always invited you to make a proposal in Merano talk page, but you didn't answer even once. Instead, you asked for a 3rd opinion. Well, my friend's opinion is one opinion. I'll tell him to come when he has time. He'll be happy of that, since it was him who made the very first edit. I told you I would keep an eye on you, you've wasted these days after this, but it was your choice.
A little remark from my side:
For long standing consensus (this is the nth time with n>10 which I observe these silly nationalistic disputes) and according to
WP:COMMONNAME, Merano and Bolzano are the names commonly used at enwiki for this two cities in South-Tyrol;
Since here we refer to a time prior to 1919, the name "Meran" is in this case appropriate.
Personally I am still for keeping the status-quo, mainly because the German majority is weak, the usage of the two forms is almost 50 - 50 and the two forms practically coincide. Meran/-o is really a "Grenzfall". :-) Last but not least, this modus vivendi has worked fairly well until now. I know, what I am writing is not very encyclopedic, but in my job area we say "Never touch the running system" :-), and I think that - provided that one can find the necessary consensus (and I strongly doubt it, since all the Italian nationalists would be against it) - the price that we should pay for this move would be an increase in edit warring. Cheers,
Alex2006 (
talk)
10:22, 30 November 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Robert McClenon: Thanks for your interest. The article states at the moment: Magnago was born in
Meran. Various IPs try to change that into Merano. I find that inapposite for the following reasons:
When Magnago was born, Meran was still part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. At those times, Meran had only one single official name, and that was Meran. The name Merano was only introduced in 1923. Therefore, writing Merano in an 1914-context is an anachronism.
Immanuel Kant's birthplace was
Königsberg,
Umberto D'Ancona's was
Fiume, and so on: It seems to be good Wikipedia practice to avoid anachronisms.
Nowadays, both Meran and Merano are official and both are used in English language. Per
WP:NOTBROKEN there is no need for exchanging one name with another.
Generally, I find the IPs' behaviour tremendously unreasonable, since their one and only interest consists in the naming dispute, brought forward with continued edit warring that made a semi-protection of the page necessary. --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
16:14, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
How many editors are involved in this dispute, anyway? I see two named editors and an IP. Is one of the named editors also editing logged out, or is this a dispute between three editors?
Robert McClenon (
talk)
16:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
It is mainly a dispute between me and an editor using a plethora of IPs (
here you can find a list of some of the involved IPs,
here a full list of the IPs' "contribution" to the article). --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
16:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Robert McClenon: The question is: have we got to use the consensus name (
Merano) or the other one (
Meran)? My opinion is to use the consensus name, which is the most common in English (this is an English encyclopedia). The user who made the requests is German-speaking and wants to use Meran. He argues that the Italian name mustn't be used because in that year Merano was not yet the official name although already used. I replied that: in
Talk:Merano was established to use Merano, not to use Merano only after it became the official name of the town; if we do what he wants, this would mean changing all Italian towns names according to the period they're referred to, because Italy was born in 1861 and before that year the official languages were a lot, from Latin to dialects, from ancient Italian to foreign conquerors' languages; he can make a request for a consensus change in Merano talk page, but he kept ignoring it, saying that there's written nowhere that Meran can't be used for that period, in fact it's just written that Merano must be used in place of Meran, nowhere is written that there's an exception for such period; I proposed to use both names, as it's already being done for other towns in en.wikipedia, but he refused and removed the Italian name which was next to the German name. That's all. Consensus version of the encyclopedia vs. secondary name in the encyclopedia. To answer your last question, the editors are Mai-Sachme and me (my IP always starts with 151.20.0-1-2-3), but the first edit was done by a friend of mine, and if you like I can ask him to come here discussing too.
Mai-Sachme had moved your comment after noclador's answer so that it looked like you answered him instead of me. This would make you all understand whom you're dealing with. The same person who modifies other people's comments and threatens the author when he dares to do the same with him.
Let me chip in here: I assume I am the only editor actually from Meran/Merano... there is a consensus on wikipedia to use a city's name as it was used when a person was born: hence
Rudyard Kipling was born in Bombay, as was
Salman Rushdie and
Zubin Mehta. Bombay was renamed in 1995 to
Mumbai, but the consensus is to keep Bombay for the people born before that. Same goes for Beijing. Sometimes people put (now named xyz) behind the old name. In that context I suggest to stick with Meran for the Magnago article.
noclador (
talk)
17:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
The original text was Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano, against consensus. The first solution has been Merano/Meran and Bolzano/Bozen. About the irony you keep doing about my edits, I could have told you already but I've been waited for the best chance to arrive: you really like being clap-clapped for your great contributions which took you God only knows how long time, you're such an extraordinary contributor, Wiki would be nothing without you, we all should bow down to you! The only thing you've always avoided is finding a line of comprimise: it was you who removed the Italian name, I just put the German one after. I've repeated you about 17 times that the consensus just says to use Merano instead of Meran, without mentioning any exception for your beloved 1914-context, because it's the most used name in English, but all in vain... I've also repeated that thing about Italian town names used in the past to show the paradox of your statement, but all in vain... And, for the 18th time, it's not "for guys like me" but "for Wikipedian CONSENSUNS" that is the wrong name to be used in this encyclopedia, I've tried using them both and you removed the Italian one (
as I said yesterday, you're not the only one able to use links). But as I can see below there's no really need for further comments... XXX — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.3.141 (
talk •
contribs)
08:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
The IP editor was correct in this case, we don't link articles by the redirect as that increases server workload needlessly. When Mai-Sachme broke 3RR, I suggested that the article be protected as it seemed both editors were headed for a block. Semi-protection seems a bad idea. See what you think of my compromise suggestion. WCMemail 23:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC) PS nice to see you
Noclador long time no see. WCMemail23:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Thank you WCM! The most important thing is to use the name Merano and link directly to the article. I was ready to accept also a compromise such as "...Meran (
Merano)..." but your solution is good. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.3.141 (
talk •
contribs)
08:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Regarding your compromise suggestion: I already explained that a couple of times here on this talk page: This kind of wording implies to readers that the town isnt'called Meran or not known by this name anymore. My point being: Meran is still one of the two official names. In fact, it's likely that English native speakers are even
more familiar with Meran. Considering these facts, a wording, which suggests that Meran is "now known as Merano" seems quite odd and mistakable to me. If server workload is really an issue, that problem
should be solved now. --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
23:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Actually if you want a truly independent 3rd opinion, you're both coming across as talking nationalist bollocks. If there are two official names, then we should simply mention them both. You have any objection to the dual name approach suggested by yourself above? WCMemail23:40, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Let me rewrite a few quotes I took from
Talk:Merano he "forgot" to mention:
"Wikipedia naming convention states to use the most common name in English which is in fact Merano"
"Bozen and Meran are most commonly called Bolzano and Merano in modern English, so we use those"
"What the English speakers do is of course more relevant for the English language Wikipedia, so Merano is the correct solution"
Same for Bolzano. You can read them at the top of the page and in the related talk page. I've told him several times: that's the consensus, his opinion isn't more relevant than Wikipedian admins' conventions established years ago, he could go to the talk page and make a proposal for a change. Everything entered an ear just to exit the other one. But at least (and at last!) you've come and resolved it. If we had to choose just 1 name from 2, it would be Merano, no doubts. Using both names would imply that the consensus name should come before the secondary name. Since he deleted the Italian name in favour of the German one, the ultimate solution was to use only the consensus name, Merano, but I agree with your proposal of 2 names and 1 link to
Merano. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.3.141 (
talk •
contribs)
08:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Tsk tsk tsk... It's not
Meran/Merano but
Meran/Merano (it takes a little, don't worry if you don't get it at once). I'm sooo-rry for your dear "WP:NOTBROKEN" or whatever. And, more important, your attempt to totally remove the Italian name refusing any compromise has failed (what a pity, to quote you)! Now you can restart living your life out of here and also go back to edit other pages (which I'll be keeping an eye on, don't you forget, Wu...pardon, Woody!)
C'mon, Woody: I know you're raged because you've, on your certainly sane point of view, "lost", but just wait, it will pass, you'll return back to your previous happiness, just have patience. And, since you didn't understand (but by now I'm not surprised any more), my "friend's" goal was to put Merano before Meran, I was interested to link to Merano instead of Meran, as I've written this morning in my first reply to WCM and tried proposing when adding Merano to Meran instead of substituting it. But I have to thank you for your being so explicit in your real intentions, in the mentality behind your actions, at least now Wikipedians know who really is the "good boy" Mai-Sachme, and this discussion shall remain here forever...
I was interested to link to Merano instead of Meran... No, you weren't.
That was your imaginary friend. And
that was you, as you
told me personally :-). Your start into the edit war wasn't a removal of the link
Meran, your childish goal was to put Merano in front of Meran. And you finally failed.
Nah. You know what you're saying is false. I can prove it. But I want to give you a chance: say it yourself. If you say that you were lying, it'll be over. But if you repeat what you've been saying since this morning, or even if you don't reply at all, I'll do it for you. I'll show everyone you were wrong and just trying getting me angry. Anyhow, the truth shall be said, either by me or by yourself. I'll be waiting... — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.0.53 (
talk)
12:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Worse than I thought... You wrote a reply and deleted it after 2 minutes! Well, before keeping my promise, let me quote it:
No, you just got caught lying. You're claiming now that your only intention was to remove the link
Meran. Brief reality check: The best choice would have been leaving the consensus name only, Merano, but it was all right to use them both, remember it was you who removed one of them, not me...
It's laughable, that you claim a "victory" now. The entire story here is just sad. If there was a "victory", then by idiocy over common sense. Endless discussions, and at the end of the story the article text states that Magnago was born in Meran/Merano. Exactly the wording
you battled against at the beginning, exactly the wording
I restored after some trolling! And no, the revision history doesn't lie. In fact it doesn't. You do. And now... Finally I can unmask the "good boy" Mai-Sachme!
If I really wanted to put Merano before Meran... HOW do you explain this edit??? Uh-oh... I see a "Meran" before "Merano"... And wait, "Merano" is closed between parenthesis?! Mumble mumble mumble... Maybe ("maybe", not of course, huh!) does this mean that... My goal wasn't to put Merano before Meran, but something different? Such as... Linking directly to Merano? And maybe the name Merano before Meran was a valid option as long as Meran had the link too but it lost its importance when there were no more links to Meran? Or maybe I'm wrong, you have a better explanation for
that... You, the one who removed the Italian name but was finally forced to accept it in the text and also to link directly to Merano instead of Meran. You, who still pretend you don't know the difference between
Meran/
Merano and
Meran/Merano. You, the only one who spoke about "victory". I've never. This shows up your mentality. You threw your mask off. After I had thanked WCM, you started trying getting me angry transforming the "Third opinion" section into a "Let's talk about how WCM's solution is my enemy's defeat". Then you rushed around the Wiki looking for a way you could take at least a little revenge on me appealing to admins. All in all... Well, I won't spoke about victory, but you actually lost twice: both in your "kampf" for Germanity in Italy and in hiding your true self. Thank you so much! And don't forget that... I'll be always taking an eye on you! XXX — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
151.20.0.53 (
talk)
14:01, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
And yes, I reverted those edits. I'm a regular contributor in the area of
South Tyrol and quite used to revert nationalistic bollocks (no matter if coming from the
German or
Italian side). If I see an (excuse my French) imbecile edit
like this one or
that one, I'm not going to let that pass. For obvious reasons, I think... --
Mai-Sachme (
talk)
23:51, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Wee Curry Monster: although I am Italian :-), I agree with Mai-Sachme here. Using "Merano" as the birth place of Magnago is an anachronism. Taking a much more important example, at Wikipedia we use "Constantinople" to define Istanbul in contexts prior to the 1920s, since this was the current name used by English sources during that period. The same should apply for Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano.
Alex2006 (
talk)
05:37, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Guys, I don't have a dog in the fight, so really don't care what the article says. My point was that directing to the subsidiary article via a redirect was bad practice.
If I may make an observation, something learned from bitter personal experience, don't keep replying to "nationalist bollocks", just ignore it and let them rant on themselves. Let them have the
WP:LASTWORD. If you keep replying, it looks to an outsider looking in as if you're just as bad. WCMemail12:50, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Next Steps
I see that at least two editors are engaged in a hostile exchange. A
third opinion was requested, but I think that no one really wants consensus; they just want to quarrel. What should be done next? You can go to
the dispute resolution noticeboard, but I wouldn't recommend it, because there is so much hostility that discussion will fail. I suggest the use of a
Request for Comments, which is binding. Otherwise, take this to
WP:ANI and see whether anyone gets blocked or topic-banned.
Robert McClenon (
talk)
16:04, 2 December 2015 (UTC)reply