![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I see that there is a citation needed tag after German speakers refer to it simply as Südtirol and usually refer to it not as a Provinz, but as a Land (such as the Länder of either Germany or Austria). Well, the information is certainly correct, but actually I don't know how to source it properly, because it's just obvious and common knowledge. The provincial government calls itself in German Landesregierung [1], the provincial assembly Landtag [2] and the official publication of the provincial press office is called "Das Land Südtirol" [3]. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 12:27, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
This might be an interesting data point for those who still think that Alto Adige is the most common English name for the province. This tool provides traffic statistics for each Wikipedia article. When we have a look at the stats for January 2011 (when South Tyrol was still a redirect like Alto Adige), we see that 443 people searched for an article called Alto Adige, 307 for Province of Bolzano, 525 for South Tirol and 3357 for South Tyrol. By looking at the April stats for Province of Bolzano-Bozen (the month when the article was moved to South Tyrol) you can see that practically all its traffic was caused by redirecting and wikilinks. Well, I admit that many of those who searched for South Ty/irol might have been German-speakers, but the same could be assumed for Alto Adige and the numbers still remain impressive since South Tyrol has been a redirect for more than 3 years at these times. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 18:21, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I found the justification of this term very weak. It is mainly used in pre-1919 publictions used in the sense of "southern Tyrol", or for the Trentino such as the Federazione delle Compagnie Schützen del Tirolo Meridionale (german Welschtiroler Schützenbund), an association from Trentino. Etymology is wrong, the term does not come from Latin Tirolis meridonalis, but from the two Italian words Tirolo and meridionale. Tirolis meridonalis is a neologism and is wrong anyway, because Tirolis is the castle, wheras the region is in LatinTirolia (see for example Flora del Tirolo meridionale by Francesco Ambrosi, Volume 1 page 822 note 1). I would delete this passage. Andreas (T) 15:30, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
I deleted the passage today. I think the "Name" section doesn't generally match the interest of most readers and is already overloaded enough. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 09:02, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
a fiscal regime that allows the province to retain 90% of all levied taxes. I think this is rather imprecise, because the province doesn't get 90% of literally all levied taxes. And weren't there recent changes following the Accordo di Milano/Mailänder Abkommen? -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 11:40, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I would like to open a new point of discussion concerning naming conventions of communes. It was politically correct to use the Ladin names, but I do not think that was a good solution. Using the German or Italian name would be more appropriate in my eyes. No English speaker would use Urtijëi. I could even live with it, if there were an indication about how to pronounce it. I mean, we are talking about a language spoken by some 30,000 people. It would be really helpful.-- Patavium ( talk) 20:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Pitjantjatjara is not a location, but a language. Besides, there is an indication about how to pronounce it and a section "Pronunciation of the name". Moreover, there is no alternative to Pitjantjatjara in a more common language (while there is one for Ladin communes, in German and Italian, which are much more common languages than Ladin).
And as to Villnöß, Margreid, Laces or Fiè allo Sciliar it is more probable that an English speaker can pronounce an Italian or German name than a language spoken by 30,000 people all over the world. If you have a look at http://www.suedtirol.info/Ortisei_St_Ulrich/Holiday_resort/L-522822C951CA11D18F1400A02427D15E-en-Ortisei_St_Ulrich.html you would see that Italian and German names are used. Wikipedia reflects the current usage and is not meant to impose the usage of names. The Ladin names are an imposition in this sense, German and/or Italian names would be better.-- Patavium ( talk) 21:31, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
There's really no need to change the ladin names - they're usually identical to the italian version: Corvara/Corvara, Badia/Badia, S.Cristina/S.Cristina, Sëlva/Selva, S.Martin/S.Martino, La Val/La Valle, Mareo/Marebbe, even Urtijëi/Ortisei are very similar. Unless someone prefers the german names (Kurfar, Abtei, St.Christina, Wolkenstein, St.Martin, Wengen, Enneberg, St.Ulrich). BTW: in the ladin valleys there are more german than italian speakers - although considerably less than ladins, which always account for more than 80%.-- Sajoch ( talk) 09:49, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
The fact that there might have been unanimous acceptation ( Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion) does not mean that it corresponds to Wikipedia standards. Let us continue with the example of Urtijei. The present solution goes against usage in English, which is the most important criterion.
Any solution is good but the Ladin names. As to the Ayers Rock: Uluru is used very often indeed. There are 18,500 hits on google books indeed. Urtijei is practically never used instead.-- Patavium ( talk) 10:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
I am saying that the Ladin names are not widely accepted English name at all. In so far the choice of that names is original research and they should not be kept. By the way Ortisei/St. Ulrich is more common than Urtijei, 166 hits. And it is not original research, as it is used by more sources than the Ladin name (I correct myself only 27 hits, including sources in German and Italian, not even English, thanks for the hint!).-- Patavium ( talk) 13:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Keeping the Ladin names seems the wisest thing. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#South Tyrol is wise enough to point to cases where English discussion is often so limited that none of the above tests indicate which of them is widely used in English. Exactly this appears to be the case for the Ladin villages, so we should stick to the local and official place names. Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 16:53, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
I had a look at the Ladin toponyms today. As far as I can see, Urtijëi seems to be the only "problematic" name. In the other cases the problem is either not or barely exisiting (Badia-Badia, Santa Cristina-Santa Cristina, Sëlva-Selva, Corvara-Corvara), mostly insignificant (I found no English book using Longiarù or Lungiarü, less than 50 using San Martino in Badia or St. Martin in Thurn...) and sometimes literally undecidable (How can I find good results for names like Abtei, Mareo, La Val, La Valle, La Villa...?). So I don't see the necessity of changing the current naming conventions which seemed to work out quite well so far. If somebody thinks that there is a widely accepted English name for Urtijëi, this topic should be discussed on the respective talk page. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 18:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
I think this is not a good idea. In Trentino there is no ethnic proportion (so there is no objective criterion). Moreover, why excluding Veneto's Ladin places (with the following problem: is Cadore Ladin too)? Then why not using the Cimbrian names for the Cimbrian communes? Why not using Friulian toponyms for places in Friuli? And so on. South Tyrol is the exception, we should not make it the rule.
As to Urtijei: it would be fine if someone could add the pronounciation.-- Patavium ( talk) 13:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
I made a check. Actually there is a declaration of the linguistic group also in Trentino (but different from that of South Tyrol). So we could change the names of the Ladin, Cimbrian and Mócheno communes. In theory I see no problem to change them, as Trentino is not a place of ethnic tensions. In practice I would not make the change, because the Italian names are those commonly used (Canazei is quite famous for tourism) and because of the Friulian etc. argument.
I am glad that Checco shares my point that the German or Italian names should be used for Ladin communes (even in South Tyrol). Me too, I cannot understand why Ladin should be taken into account and Friulian / Sardinian etc. have no dignity at all.-- Patavium ( talk) 21:33, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Of course, consensus can change. And if someone wanted to suggest a new criterion, I'd be open to hear it. But I don't think it's WP:COMMONNAME in this case.By the way, where was your appeal to WP:COMMONNAME in the Trentino-Alto Adige move request? :)
As for Sardinian and Friulian towns - feel free to make a case for them, too. You never know what Wikipedian consensus will come up with! Dohn joe ( talk) 23:36, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The Ladin communities in Trentino with their language and culture and heritage are protected by the Italian state by law, just like in South Tyrol. The Italian parliament passed national law No. 482 of 1999, Legislative Decree No. 592 of 1993 and Provincial Law No. 4 of 1999 that put Ladin under protection by the state and the region. The 2001 reform of the Autonomy Statute further enhanced those rights. The Provincial Law No. 7 of 2004 extended the protection, rights and explicit promotion of the minority languages to the Mocheno and Cimbrian communities. Decree Law No. 178 of 2006, Provincial Law No. 3 of 2006 and Provincial Law of 2006 further extended the protection and rights of the minorities. [9] Gryffindor ( talk) 22:57, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The decrees and provincial laws you cited just apply to the province of Trent. Therefore I see no obstacle to keeping South Tyrol as the only exception. And yes, there is inconsistence in this discussion. When it is about to erase the Italian names, common usage is used as an argument. When common usage would suggest the usage of Italian (Canazei) or German names (St. Ulrich), then you exclude the validity of common usage.-- Patavium ( talk) 11:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Second, we have a process in place to decide the article titles for non-South Tyrol towns. Start with WP:COMMONNAME. If there is a name used commonly in English-language sources, use it. If not, follow the advice of WP:NCGN#Multiple local names, and come up with an objective criterion to choose a title. In South Tyrol, consensus has been to follow the official language survey. In Trentino or Veneto, you can propose the same, or you can propose to use Italian because 90+% of the towns in those province/regions are in Italian, or whatever.
And Patavium, if you feel that there is enough evidence to show that Canazei or St. Ulrich are the common names, go ahead and bring that up on those talkpages. Like I said, the WP:NCGN#Multiple local names advice only kicks in when there is no common name. If there is one, then we use it. Dohn joe ( talk) 23:13, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
This term is sometimes used in Italian, but we need to document this with sources. Again, hard to come by with, given the name is not official. One thing I notices is that at http://www.vacanza-alto-adige.it/sudtirolo.html Sudtirolo is only the southernmost part of the province, also called Il Giardino del Sudtirolo, German Südtirol Süd. Andreas (T) 18:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry Sajoch, but the second reference was original research at its best. Our current problem is that we can only source the information either using a synthesis of published material that advances a position or using unreliable sources like this blog (È strano osservare come una denominazione sempre più popolare nell’uso quotidiano abbia, invece, grossissime difficoltà ad affermarsi altrettanto «sul mercato».) If I remember correctly, I once read in a book (or in a journal?) that the popularity of the term Sudtirolo was enhanced by the Italian left in the 70ies. Unfortunately, I don't remember where I read it, maybe I'll find out on Monday. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 09:30, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Hoepli has sudtirolese = Del Sud Tirolo but not Sudtirolo. Andreas (T) 15:26, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
I found excellent references today. [14] -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 17:29, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Shouldn't this entry be called Alto Adige? The only people who call it the South Tyrol are the people who claim it is really part of Austria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.78.245.223 ( talk) 22:43, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
[19], [20]... I appeal to Gryffindor and Dohn joe to avoid further reverts and to discuss first on this talk page. I have to admit that I prefer Dohn joe's version (and especially his last edit), because I understand his argument that the several references are superfluous since they don't discuss the prevalence of "South Tyrol" in English - only that those particular sources use that name. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 08:43, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
This section has seen a lot of edits over the last week. I'd like to propose largely restoring it to its previous version - something like this. My reason:
Some of the changes, such as adding the official Ladin name, should stay. What do other editors think of returning to the earlier version? Dohn joe ( talk) 15:49, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Not only that, but my Google Books search shows that the earliest use of "Haut-Adige" was in the mid-1700s, with the first use of "Alto Adige" coming in the late 1700s, while the first use of "Südtirol" was in the early 1800s. "South Tyrol" has one entry from the early 1800s, but doesn't show up in earnest until the 1820s. So by that yardstick, "Haut-Adige" should go first, followed by "Alto Adige", "Südtirol", and then "South Tyrol".
Again, though, I don't think chronology is the most important factor here - explaining English-language usage is. And by that yardstick, only "South Tyrol" and "Alto Adige" matter, because those are by far the two most common names used in English-language sources for the province. Haut-Adige is only a footnote as far as English usage is concerned. Thus, I would reinsert an intro sentence stating that there are two commonly-used names for this province in English, which reflects the complex history of the area. Then, I'd have one paragraph explaining where "South Tyrol" comes from, and one paragraph explaining where "Alto Adige" comes from. Does that make sense? Dohn joe ( talk) 20:30, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
In general I'm fine with the section in its current shape, just two minor remarks: I don't like the claim that Napoleon himself annexed and renamed parts of the County of Tyrol (citing Bert Brecht: The young Alexander conquered India. Was he alone? Caesar beat the Gauls. Did he not even have a cook with him?). Secondly, I think the sources presented in reference 3 are a bit odd since they are apparently just randomly chosen Google Books hits. Books like Grandi Vini: An Opinionated Tour of Italy's 89 Finest Wines or Mussolini: the last 600 days of il Duce don't really focus on the province and hardly show a deliberate choice for one of the two names. In fact, I have the strong suspicion that (almost) everyone who writes precisely "about" the province (in recent times) uses South Tyrol. Alto Adige seems to me more like a debris of Italian source material - just my original research... -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 19:59, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Just to illustrate my point: Assuming, that publications focussing on the province should at least mention the province's name in its title, we can do a search for English books with Alto Adige in its title on Google Books. So we get - as usual excluding Trentino in order to avoid hits for the wider region - 39 books. Unfortunately, some of them are actually written in Italian, counting only English books i come to the number of 27. Excluding multiple entries like [21], [22] and [23] and papers presented at the International Meeting on Protein Semisynthesis : held on 4-8th September, 1977 at Bressanone-Brixen, Alto Adige-Sudtirol, Italy [24] the number diminishes further. And if we finally consider the publication dates of the books we see that just one (!) of these books has been published in the last 30 years, i.e. the proceedings of the Sesto-2001 Workshop held in Sesto Pusteria, Alto Adige/Südtirol, Italy, 3-6 July 2001 [25]. Certainly a surprising outcome for a "commonly used English" name.
Doing the same procedure with South Tyrol we get 128 English books, 48 of them written after 1980. But I'm just playing around with search tools. "Alto Adige" is certainly used, but I suspect mostly in casual contexts. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 21:47, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Dohn Joe, what are these sources you are showing? The book here you quote for Alto Adige [26] clearly gives "South Tyrol" as well on page 26 [27]. Same problem applies to this book [28], [29], and this one cannot be opened Grandi Vini: An Opinionated Tour of Italy's 89 Finest Wines therefore your claim hard to verify. And I don't know how an "Opinionated Tour of Italy's finest wines" can be considered as an academic source. Your quote about the Cisalpine Republic is also not clear, it is mentioned once on page 261 as "Distretto dell' Alto Adige Capo Luogo". Where is the information coming from in your sentence "Alto Adige was the name of a district in the Department of Benaco in the Cisalpine Republic, and consisted of municipalities now largely in the Province of Verona."? Gryffindor ( talk) 11:04, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
2) As for the Cisalpine citation, it seemed pretty clear to me that the "Distretto dell'Alto Adige" was part of the "Dipartimento del Benaco" in the Cisalpine Republic, and that the Comunità listed thereafter were largely part of today's Province of Verona. If that latter phrase seems too much like original synthesis, then I'd be willing to drop it.
3) I also dropped "Haut-Adige" from the provenance of "Alto Adige", as regardless of whether the term originated in the Cisalpine Republic or the Kingdom of Italy, both of those states named their political units in Italian. So while "Haut-Adige" was used in French, there's no reason to refer to it in this section, unless someone can show explicitly that it led directly to "Alto Adige". Does that make sense? Dohn joe ( talk) 20:25, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
2) I found a clearer source showing that the District of Alto Adige was in the Department of Benaco in the Cisalpine Republic, and included the town of Zevio. Therefore, I added it back to the article.
3) Related to that, we now have sources calling the district "Alto Adige" in 1797 and 1798 - the very beginning of the Cisalpine Republic. If someone can prove that "Alto Adige" evolved from "Haut Adige", that's fine; otherwise, I don't think we can make that claim.
I also removed the POV tag, as I believe everything in the Alto Adige paragraph is verifiable. Dohn joe ( talk) 17:54, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
1) Bad idea, since we need sources to show that South Tyrol is the most commonly used term in English before anything else, which we agreed upon. So how should we prove that in your opinion? There can be a list showing that Alto Adige is also used in English, but you need to make clear that it is not used as often as the previous term, and the wording of your paragraph does not make that very clear. 2) I still object that you are putting in the Alto Adige in the leading sentence, and I know that I am not alone with this concern. It is creating an artificial highlight of the name, which is all explained in the "name" section anyways. 3) Concerning your new source, that one is much clearer and can be used. Concerning the history of the term, the Italian article here [31] and a map here [32] might help shed some light into the situation. 4) You seem to want to divide the "name" section into explaining South Tyrol and then Alto Adige, as opposed to a chronological order, followed by the official use of the moment, is that correct? 5) I am re-adding tags since we are still in disagreement and in current discussion, therefore obviously neutrality is not given yet. As it states in the tags, do not remove them until the issues have been clearly settled and we have found consensus. Gryffindor ( talk) 07:01, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
1) The problem with lists of sources is that they can't prove which term is most common, unless you list every single source that uses both terms. Otherwise, it's essentially a random list. For example, if you had a list of five sources using "South Tyrol", I could create a list of six sources using "Alto Adige". You then could create a list of seven "South Tyrol" sources, which I could counter with an eight-source list for "Alto Adige", and on and on until we ran out of sources. And what do we do with the ones that use both? The only way we can "prove" that "South Tyrol" is more common is if there is a source out there that says explicitly, "South Tyrol is more common than Alto Adige in English", or something to that effect. I understand your concern about other editors, but I think there was enough evidence shown during the last move request that "South Tyrol" is more common (ngrams, Google Books, etc.), that we can leave that statement as is, and point doubters to those proofs.
2) I was actually thinking that a separate article on the history of "Alto Adige" - as district, department, and province - would be a good idea. I'll see if I can work something up - or anyone else is also free to do so.
3) And yes, Mai-Sachme, as far as I know it was just two. I put "various" more or less as a weasel word, since I haven't found a source saying it was exactly two. Dohn joe ( talk) 17:19, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
The previous layout of a simple "Name" section is better than these two confusing subsections "English-language usage" and "Local and official usage". Subsections are warranted if they are long enough in text, and that is not the case. Best to revert to the previous format of having just one section. Gryffindor ( talk) 03:37, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Folks here may be interested to know that Gryffindor and I have been working on a new article about the historical district and department of Alto Adige/Haut-Adige/Upper Adige. We're having trouble picking the right title for the article, though. Check out the discussion at Talk:Haut-Adige and weigh in if you're interested. Thanks! Dohn joe ( talk) 17:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Okay, folks. Let's get down to the NPOV and the UNDUE tags currently in the article. Since there are two tags, I'll ask two questions.
Hopefully we can get to the bottom of this and remove the tags soon. Dohn joe ( talk) 00:03, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
WHAT A SHAME! ALTO ADIGE is in Italy, don't forget it... Un altoatesino. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.46.249.211 ( talk) 14:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I still disagree. 1) The NPOV tag is due to the fact that the term "South Tyrol" is used twice as much in English as the term "Alto Adige" [33]. Having it in bold in the intro gives it undue weight. 2) The part which mentions the usage of "Sudtirolo" in Italian should be moved further up where the term "South Tyrol" is explained. Gryffindor ( talk) 22:13, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
This map shows the Ladin municipalitites coloured in blue. The legend of the map in the section Demographics, however, says that a Ladin majority is shown by the colour orange. Can anyone fix this contradiction? I don't know how to find the right code for the colour appearing in the map. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 11:40, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
The neutrality of the article is STILL disputed, even if some Austrians want to erase the tag. The article should be named ALTO ADIGE/SOUTH TYROL. Even because it is an area that is inside Italy and there it is a huge Italian speaking community in Alto Adige (that in Bolzano it is even the majority!).An Italian "altoatesino" born in Bolzano. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.208.127.65 ( talk) 14:41, 8 September 2011
Move requests have been brought up here and here. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 19:37, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Alto Adige/South tyrol is a geographic area, in this voice is about the Autonomous province of Bolzano -- Pava ( talk) 00:21, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
The results are out: [34], the pdf attached to the press release [35] lists all the details for all the villages and cities. noclador ( talk) 12:46, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
The article states that Austria and Italy ended their dispute with an autonomy agreement in 1992. It would like to point out that (as the article states previously, albeit in somewhat cloudy wording) the autonomy agreement dates back to the year 1972 while it took 20 more years to resolve the dispute. -- Mampfus ( talk) 19:28, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
The article at its current state reads:
I demand this to be changed to: the opinion it was created from a portion, etc. I do not understand why Ascoli inventing the phrase: Venezia Giulia is a clear, hateful example of Italian irredentism, while the poor and civilized Austro-Bavarian shepherds of Alto Adige claiming it to be an integral part of a long-gone County are simply assessing their rights against the bad, bad Italians.
Moreover:
Finally:
All these changes I've been making have been reverted twice, and I've been asked to produce them here on the talk page. So I've done. I expect inputs. -- 80.181.225.114 ( talk) 13:38, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
It's a clear insult against every native South Tyrolean to the "Italian" names "Merano" and "Bolznao" in English instead of the correct German names Meran and Bozen for these two cities.
The "Italian" town names in South Tyrol are not really Italian. In fact, they are pure phantasy names invented by a fascist criminal called Ettore Tolomei, for the "Ialianziation" of South Tyrol. These names are also an insult for Italy's language and rich cultural traditon. In fact, even the original Italian name for South Tyrol - "Sudtirolo" was banned by Mussolini in favour of the fictional "Aldo Adige". No one should be able to see anymore that this area has never really been part of Italy, but has been illegally (i.e. against the populations will) annexed after World War I. Tolomei worked on a whole catalog to replace virtually every German and Ladin geographical name in the area with an Italian one. Due to this fact, these new "names" are on the same level with communist phantasy "town names" like Stalingrad, Kaliningrad, Leningrad, Karl-Marx-Stadt or Ho Chi Minh City.
Using these fictional names in English instead of the original German and Ladin ones is like a posthumous glorification of Mussolini and his crimes against humanity!
I agree with the anon user however that the name should be Meran, and not Merano. The majority of the population speaks German and we have established the rule to name the cities after the language spoken by the majority. That article needs to be moved. Gryffindor ( talk) 05:57, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
This has been discussed for years and the current names reflect the consensus. I'm in full support of using the names of the majority of the population, which means using German for most municipalities but Italian for Bolzano. Merano is a tricky case. It is split almost equally between speakers of German and Italian. The policy in this case has been to use Merano because it is by far the more common name used in English. So just as we say Rome instead of 'Roma and Florence instead of 'Firenze', we use Merano as it is common English usage. Jeppiz ( talk) 13:34, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Probably, at least I hope, it's a topic that's already been raised quite a few times. If it hasn't, here's the point: no Italian speaker, at least among the mentally healthy, would ever call this province Sudtirolo. Moreover, the reported IPA spelling of this word - with /tt/ instead of /dt/ - is wrong, quite laughably in a manner that (somehow) suggests the author of the introduction handling German phonetics better than the Italian one. Sometimes you might hear the adjective sudtirolese, but still it's rather odd, altoatesino is definitely dominant between Italians, and Provincia di Bolzano is the only alternative name of the area which gets used, beyond Alto Adige. Even the local native speakers of German, while speaking Italian, tend to use the Italian names of the province and its towns. I suggest rewriting the whole first paragraphs, I would do it myself, if I weren't sure somebody would revert it in a few hours with no given reason. Nothing to say about the English name, sincerely, it doesn't concern nor interest me. Greetings, -- 79.25.51.160 ( talk) 22:32, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
The bias against italians in this wiki article is outrageous. The authors forgot to mention the violent germanisation to which this region and its inhabitants were subject during the centuries. The history of this region doesn't start in 1922 with the birth of Fascsim. Maybe it should have been remembered that the prevalent german speaking population is the result of centuries of forced germanization and migration of population from Austria and South Germany in a territory placed in the italian peninsula and inhabited by people culturally latin.
Meeting of the Council of Ministers of 12 November 1866 Emperor Franz Joseph.
12th november 1866
“ Se. Majestät (Franz Joseph I.) sprach den bestimmten Befehl aus, daß auf die entschiedenste Art dem Einflusse des in einigen Kronländern noch vorhandenen italienischen Elementes entgegengetreten und durch geeignete Besetzung der Stellen von politischen, Gerichtsbeamten, Lehrern sowie durch den Einfluß der Presse in Südtirol, Dalmatien und dem Küstenlande auf die Germanisierung oder Slawisierung der betreffenden Landesteile je nach Umständen mit aller Energie und ohne alle Rücksicht hingearbeitet werde. Se. Majestät legt es allen Zentralstellen als strenge Pflicht auf, in diesem Sinne planmäßig vorzugehen ”
“His Majesty has expressed the precise order that we decisively oppose the influence of the Italian element still present in some Crown lands, and to aim unsparingly and without the slightest compunction at the Germanization or Slavicization – depending on the circumstances – of the areas in question, through a suitable entrustment of posts to political magistrates and teachers, as well as through the influence of the press in South Tyrol, Dalmatia, and the Adriatic Coast.”
Magnagr ( talk) 03:23, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Please take a "piece" of "bias" or what is missing, suggest here what should be, with sources, and let's talk. -- Robertiki ( talk) 18:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on South Tyrol. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
I know the issue was already discussed here. Nevertheless, I find it quite silly that of the over 100 provinces of Italy, there are two that do not follow the naming convention Province of X (Bolzano Alto-Adige / Bozen Südtirol and Trento). This goes against WP:NCCS, which ironically brings as an example exactly the provinces of Italy. Mind that this is not a politically motivated rant and that seeing Trentino instead of Province of Trento irritates me just as much if not more. From the outside, it looks as if Wikipedia can't distinguish between the official names of administrative subdivisions and the brand names that those same administrative subdivisions use worldwide to market their touristic industry. -- Japs 88 ( talk) 14:08, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
The history section of this article is unbalanced with nothing prior to the 20th century issues around transfer to Italy. The history section should give a balanced overview of the regional history across the centuries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.184.88 ( talk) 12:54, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
I started a discussion at
Talk:List of political parties in Italy/Archive 1#Regional presidents in infoboxes on whether the two provincial presidents of Trentino ans South Tyrol should be equated to regional presidents, as it already happens in the Conference of Regions and Autonomous Provinces.
Please have a say! --
Checco (
talk)
06:54, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
A nationalist IP keeps changing the article against the established consensus of using the local name first. So the question is quite simple: should we stick to the established consensus of using the local name first or should we always use German first as its the majority language? Using Italian first because it's the national language, as the IP claims, is not really an option as it's contrary to established practice across Wikipedia (we don't use Dutch names for French parts of Belgium, German names for French parts of Switzerland, etc.). Jeppiz ( talk) 11:30, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
This page has a wrong name; names of italian 'regioni' and 'province' are written in the Italian Constitution; please fix it as soon as possible! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.30.200.163 ( talk) 18:51, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
The name is correct! It is simply crazy to think that the name of an Italian / Russian / German region in the ENGLISH wikipedia has to be written in Italian / Russian / German: the name of the page for Germany is indeed "Germany", not "Deutschland"!-- Federicolo ( talk) 08:36, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Dear users, for a university workshop I'm inserting a little paragraph regarding Transhumance in the Culture section. I really hope you appreciate my contribution. I wish you all an happy new year! -- ADunibg ( talk) 17:03, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, I've been having absolutely outrageous difficulties in linking the appropriate article ( Coat of arms of Tyrol) for the CoA image in the infobox. Can someone link this for me? Sincerely, a noob who's bad at editing. Theodore Christopher ( talk) 01:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Mai-Sachme: both these terms are used in current English as adjectives plus Tyrolese means the Tyrolean people. For example, see the Collins dictionary entry for Tyrolese. And according to Ngram Viewer, "the Tyrolese" is now more common than "Tyroleans". I'd say both are entirely current, neither is wrong but Tyrolese has the edge when referring to the Tyrolean people. Of course, it's only used in that context. Bermicourt ( talk) 13:40, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
I think that we should change the name of Merano in Meran here, since per Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(geographic_names) in South Tyrol we should use the denomination of the language of the linguistic majority. This implies also a move of Merano to Meran. There could be an exception only if in the English sources Merano prevails over Meran. Alex2006 ( talk) 17:03, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I see that there is a citation needed tag after German speakers refer to it simply as Südtirol and usually refer to it not as a Provinz, but as a Land (such as the Länder of either Germany or Austria). Well, the information is certainly correct, but actually I don't know how to source it properly, because it's just obvious and common knowledge. The provincial government calls itself in German Landesregierung [1], the provincial assembly Landtag [2] and the official publication of the provincial press office is called "Das Land Südtirol" [3]. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 12:27, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
This might be an interesting data point for those who still think that Alto Adige is the most common English name for the province. This tool provides traffic statistics for each Wikipedia article. When we have a look at the stats for January 2011 (when South Tyrol was still a redirect like Alto Adige), we see that 443 people searched for an article called Alto Adige, 307 for Province of Bolzano, 525 for South Tirol and 3357 for South Tyrol. By looking at the April stats for Province of Bolzano-Bozen (the month when the article was moved to South Tyrol) you can see that practically all its traffic was caused by redirecting and wikilinks. Well, I admit that many of those who searched for South Ty/irol might have been German-speakers, but the same could be assumed for Alto Adige and the numbers still remain impressive since South Tyrol has been a redirect for more than 3 years at these times. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 18:21, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I found the justification of this term very weak. It is mainly used in pre-1919 publictions used in the sense of "southern Tyrol", or for the Trentino such as the Federazione delle Compagnie Schützen del Tirolo Meridionale (german Welschtiroler Schützenbund), an association from Trentino. Etymology is wrong, the term does not come from Latin Tirolis meridonalis, but from the two Italian words Tirolo and meridionale. Tirolis meridonalis is a neologism and is wrong anyway, because Tirolis is the castle, wheras the region is in LatinTirolia (see for example Flora del Tirolo meridionale by Francesco Ambrosi, Volume 1 page 822 note 1). I would delete this passage. Andreas (T) 15:30, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
I deleted the passage today. I think the "Name" section doesn't generally match the interest of most readers and is already overloaded enough. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 09:02, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
a fiscal regime that allows the province to retain 90% of all levied taxes. I think this is rather imprecise, because the province doesn't get 90% of literally all levied taxes. And weren't there recent changes following the Accordo di Milano/Mailänder Abkommen? -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 11:40, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I would like to open a new point of discussion concerning naming conventions of communes. It was politically correct to use the Ladin names, but I do not think that was a good solution. Using the German or Italian name would be more appropriate in my eyes. No English speaker would use Urtijëi. I could even live with it, if there were an indication about how to pronounce it. I mean, we are talking about a language spoken by some 30,000 people. It would be really helpful.-- Patavium ( talk) 20:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Pitjantjatjara is not a location, but a language. Besides, there is an indication about how to pronounce it and a section "Pronunciation of the name". Moreover, there is no alternative to Pitjantjatjara in a more common language (while there is one for Ladin communes, in German and Italian, which are much more common languages than Ladin).
And as to Villnöß, Margreid, Laces or Fiè allo Sciliar it is more probable that an English speaker can pronounce an Italian or German name than a language spoken by 30,000 people all over the world. If you have a look at http://www.suedtirol.info/Ortisei_St_Ulrich/Holiday_resort/L-522822C951CA11D18F1400A02427D15E-en-Ortisei_St_Ulrich.html you would see that Italian and German names are used. Wikipedia reflects the current usage and is not meant to impose the usage of names. The Ladin names are an imposition in this sense, German and/or Italian names would be better.-- Patavium ( talk) 21:31, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
There's really no need to change the ladin names - they're usually identical to the italian version: Corvara/Corvara, Badia/Badia, S.Cristina/S.Cristina, Sëlva/Selva, S.Martin/S.Martino, La Val/La Valle, Mareo/Marebbe, even Urtijëi/Ortisei are very similar. Unless someone prefers the german names (Kurfar, Abtei, St.Christina, Wolkenstein, St.Martin, Wengen, Enneberg, St.Ulrich). BTW: in the ladin valleys there are more german than italian speakers - although considerably less than ladins, which always account for more than 80%.-- Sajoch ( talk) 09:49, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
The fact that there might have been unanimous acceptation ( Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion) does not mean that it corresponds to Wikipedia standards. Let us continue with the example of Urtijei. The present solution goes against usage in English, which is the most important criterion.
Any solution is good but the Ladin names. As to the Ayers Rock: Uluru is used very often indeed. There are 18,500 hits on google books indeed. Urtijei is practically never used instead.-- Patavium ( talk) 10:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
I am saying that the Ladin names are not widely accepted English name at all. In so far the choice of that names is original research and they should not be kept. By the way Ortisei/St. Ulrich is more common than Urtijei, 166 hits. And it is not original research, as it is used by more sources than the Ladin name (I correct myself only 27 hits, including sources in German and Italian, not even English, thanks for the hint!).-- Patavium ( talk) 13:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Keeping the Ladin names seems the wisest thing. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#South Tyrol is wise enough to point to cases where English discussion is often so limited that none of the above tests indicate which of them is widely used in English. Exactly this appears to be the case for the Ladin villages, so we should stick to the local and official place names. Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 16:53, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
I had a look at the Ladin toponyms today. As far as I can see, Urtijëi seems to be the only "problematic" name. In the other cases the problem is either not or barely exisiting (Badia-Badia, Santa Cristina-Santa Cristina, Sëlva-Selva, Corvara-Corvara), mostly insignificant (I found no English book using Longiarù or Lungiarü, less than 50 using San Martino in Badia or St. Martin in Thurn...) and sometimes literally undecidable (How can I find good results for names like Abtei, Mareo, La Val, La Valle, La Villa...?). So I don't see the necessity of changing the current naming conventions which seemed to work out quite well so far. If somebody thinks that there is a widely accepted English name for Urtijëi, this topic should be discussed on the respective talk page. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 18:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
I think this is not a good idea. In Trentino there is no ethnic proportion (so there is no objective criterion). Moreover, why excluding Veneto's Ladin places (with the following problem: is Cadore Ladin too)? Then why not using the Cimbrian names for the Cimbrian communes? Why not using Friulian toponyms for places in Friuli? And so on. South Tyrol is the exception, we should not make it the rule.
As to Urtijei: it would be fine if someone could add the pronounciation.-- Patavium ( talk) 13:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
I made a check. Actually there is a declaration of the linguistic group also in Trentino (but different from that of South Tyrol). So we could change the names of the Ladin, Cimbrian and Mócheno communes. In theory I see no problem to change them, as Trentino is not a place of ethnic tensions. In practice I would not make the change, because the Italian names are those commonly used (Canazei is quite famous for tourism) and because of the Friulian etc. argument.
I am glad that Checco shares my point that the German or Italian names should be used for Ladin communes (even in South Tyrol). Me too, I cannot understand why Ladin should be taken into account and Friulian / Sardinian etc. have no dignity at all.-- Patavium ( talk) 21:33, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Of course, consensus can change. And if someone wanted to suggest a new criterion, I'd be open to hear it. But I don't think it's WP:COMMONNAME in this case.By the way, where was your appeal to WP:COMMONNAME in the Trentino-Alto Adige move request? :)
As for Sardinian and Friulian towns - feel free to make a case for them, too. You never know what Wikipedian consensus will come up with! Dohn joe ( talk) 23:36, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The Ladin communities in Trentino with their language and culture and heritage are protected by the Italian state by law, just like in South Tyrol. The Italian parliament passed national law No. 482 of 1999, Legislative Decree No. 592 of 1993 and Provincial Law No. 4 of 1999 that put Ladin under protection by the state and the region. The 2001 reform of the Autonomy Statute further enhanced those rights. The Provincial Law No. 7 of 2004 extended the protection, rights and explicit promotion of the minority languages to the Mocheno and Cimbrian communities. Decree Law No. 178 of 2006, Provincial Law No. 3 of 2006 and Provincial Law of 2006 further extended the protection and rights of the minorities. [9] Gryffindor ( talk) 22:57, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The decrees and provincial laws you cited just apply to the province of Trent. Therefore I see no obstacle to keeping South Tyrol as the only exception. And yes, there is inconsistence in this discussion. When it is about to erase the Italian names, common usage is used as an argument. When common usage would suggest the usage of Italian (Canazei) or German names (St. Ulrich), then you exclude the validity of common usage.-- Patavium ( talk) 11:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Second, we have a process in place to decide the article titles for non-South Tyrol towns. Start with WP:COMMONNAME. If there is a name used commonly in English-language sources, use it. If not, follow the advice of WP:NCGN#Multiple local names, and come up with an objective criterion to choose a title. In South Tyrol, consensus has been to follow the official language survey. In Trentino or Veneto, you can propose the same, or you can propose to use Italian because 90+% of the towns in those province/regions are in Italian, or whatever.
And Patavium, if you feel that there is enough evidence to show that Canazei or St. Ulrich are the common names, go ahead and bring that up on those talkpages. Like I said, the WP:NCGN#Multiple local names advice only kicks in when there is no common name. If there is one, then we use it. Dohn joe ( talk) 23:13, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
This term is sometimes used in Italian, but we need to document this with sources. Again, hard to come by with, given the name is not official. One thing I notices is that at http://www.vacanza-alto-adige.it/sudtirolo.html Sudtirolo is only the southernmost part of the province, also called Il Giardino del Sudtirolo, German Südtirol Süd. Andreas (T) 18:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Sorry Sajoch, but the second reference was original research at its best. Our current problem is that we can only source the information either using a synthesis of published material that advances a position or using unreliable sources like this blog (È strano osservare come una denominazione sempre più popolare nell’uso quotidiano abbia, invece, grossissime difficoltà ad affermarsi altrettanto «sul mercato».) If I remember correctly, I once read in a book (or in a journal?) that the popularity of the term Sudtirolo was enhanced by the Italian left in the 70ies. Unfortunately, I don't remember where I read it, maybe I'll find out on Monday. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 09:30, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Hoepli has sudtirolese = Del Sud Tirolo but not Sudtirolo. Andreas (T) 15:26, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
I found excellent references today. [14] -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 17:29, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Shouldn't this entry be called Alto Adige? The only people who call it the South Tyrol are the people who claim it is really part of Austria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.78.245.223 ( talk) 22:43, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
[19], [20]... I appeal to Gryffindor and Dohn joe to avoid further reverts and to discuss first on this talk page. I have to admit that I prefer Dohn joe's version (and especially his last edit), because I understand his argument that the several references are superfluous since they don't discuss the prevalence of "South Tyrol" in English - only that those particular sources use that name. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 08:43, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
This section has seen a lot of edits over the last week. I'd like to propose largely restoring it to its previous version - something like this. My reason:
Some of the changes, such as adding the official Ladin name, should stay. What do other editors think of returning to the earlier version? Dohn joe ( talk) 15:49, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Not only that, but my Google Books search shows that the earliest use of "Haut-Adige" was in the mid-1700s, with the first use of "Alto Adige" coming in the late 1700s, while the first use of "Südtirol" was in the early 1800s. "South Tyrol" has one entry from the early 1800s, but doesn't show up in earnest until the 1820s. So by that yardstick, "Haut-Adige" should go first, followed by "Alto Adige", "Südtirol", and then "South Tyrol".
Again, though, I don't think chronology is the most important factor here - explaining English-language usage is. And by that yardstick, only "South Tyrol" and "Alto Adige" matter, because those are by far the two most common names used in English-language sources for the province. Haut-Adige is only a footnote as far as English usage is concerned. Thus, I would reinsert an intro sentence stating that there are two commonly-used names for this province in English, which reflects the complex history of the area. Then, I'd have one paragraph explaining where "South Tyrol" comes from, and one paragraph explaining where "Alto Adige" comes from. Does that make sense? Dohn joe ( talk) 20:30, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
In general I'm fine with the section in its current shape, just two minor remarks: I don't like the claim that Napoleon himself annexed and renamed parts of the County of Tyrol (citing Bert Brecht: The young Alexander conquered India. Was he alone? Caesar beat the Gauls. Did he not even have a cook with him?). Secondly, I think the sources presented in reference 3 are a bit odd since they are apparently just randomly chosen Google Books hits. Books like Grandi Vini: An Opinionated Tour of Italy's 89 Finest Wines or Mussolini: the last 600 days of il Duce don't really focus on the province and hardly show a deliberate choice for one of the two names. In fact, I have the strong suspicion that (almost) everyone who writes precisely "about" the province (in recent times) uses South Tyrol. Alto Adige seems to me more like a debris of Italian source material - just my original research... -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 19:59, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Just to illustrate my point: Assuming, that publications focussing on the province should at least mention the province's name in its title, we can do a search for English books with Alto Adige in its title on Google Books. So we get - as usual excluding Trentino in order to avoid hits for the wider region - 39 books. Unfortunately, some of them are actually written in Italian, counting only English books i come to the number of 27. Excluding multiple entries like [21], [22] and [23] and papers presented at the International Meeting on Protein Semisynthesis : held on 4-8th September, 1977 at Bressanone-Brixen, Alto Adige-Sudtirol, Italy [24] the number diminishes further. And if we finally consider the publication dates of the books we see that just one (!) of these books has been published in the last 30 years, i.e. the proceedings of the Sesto-2001 Workshop held in Sesto Pusteria, Alto Adige/Südtirol, Italy, 3-6 July 2001 [25]. Certainly a surprising outcome for a "commonly used English" name.
Doing the same procedure with South Tyrol we get 128 English books, 48 of them written after 1980. But I'm just playing around with search tools. "Alto Adige" is certainly used, but I suspect mostly in casual contexts. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 21:47, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Dohn Joe, what are these sources you are showing? The book here you quote for Alto Adige [26] clearly gives "South Tyrol" as well on page 26 [27]. Same problem applies to this book [28], [29], and this one cannot be opened Grandi Vini: An Opinionated Tour of Italy's 89 Finest Wines therefore your claim hard to verify. And I don't know how an "Opinionated Tour of Italy's finest wines" can be considered as an academic source. Your quote about the Cisalpine Republic is also not clear, it is mentioned once on page 261 as "Distretto dell' Alto Adige Capo Luogo". Where is the information coming from in your sentence "Alto Adige was the name of a district in the Department of Benaco in the Cisalpine Republic, and consisted of municipalities now largely in the Province of Verona."? Gryffindor ( talk) 11:04, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
2) As for the Cisalpine citation, it seemed pretty clear to me that the "Distretto dell'Alto Adige" was part of the "Dipartimento del Benaco" in the Cisalpine Republic, and that the Comunità listed thereafter were largely part of today's Province of Verona. If that latter phrase seems too much like original synthesis, then I'd be willing to drop it.
3) I also dropped "Haut-Adige" from the provenance of "Alto Adige", as regardless of whether the term originated in the Cisalpine Republic or the Kingdom of Italy, both of those states named their political units in Italian. So while "Haut-Adige" was used in French, there's no reason to refer to it in this section, unless someone can show explicitly that it led directly to "Alto Adige". Does that make sense? Dohn joe ( talk) 20:25, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
2) I found a clearer source showing that the District of Alto Adige was in the Department of Benaco in the Cisalpine Republic, and included the town of Zevio. Therefore, I added it back to the article.
3) Related to that, we now have sources calling the district "Alto Adige" in 1797 and 1798 - the very beginning of the Cisalpine Republic. If someone can prove that "Alto Adige" evolved from "Haut Adige", that's fine; otherwise, I don't think we can make that claim.
I also removed the POV tag, as I believe everything in the Alto Adige paragraph is verifiable. Dohn joe ( talk) 17:54, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
1) Bad idea, since we need sources to show that South Tyrol is the most commonly used term in English before anything else, which we agreed upon. So how should we prove that in your opinion? There can be a list showing that Alto Adige is also used in English, but you need to make clear that it is not used as often as the previous term, and the wording of your paragraph does not make that very clear. 2) I still object that you are putting in the Alto Adige in the leading sentence, and I know that I am not alone with this concern. It is creating an artificial highlight of the name, which is all explained in the "name" section anyways. 3) Concerning your new source, that one is much clearer and can be used. Concerning the history of the term, the Italian article here [31] and a map here [32] might help shed some light into the situation. 4) You seem to want to divide the "name" section into explaining South Tyrol and then Alto Adige, as opposed to a chronological order, followed by the official use of the moment, is that correct? 5) I am re-adding tags since we are still in disagreement and in current discussion, therefore obviously neutrality is not given yet. As it states in the tags, do not remove them until the issues have been clearly settled and we have found consensus. Gryffindor ( talk) 07:01, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
1) The problem with lists of sources is that they can't prove which term is most common, unless you list every single source that uses both terms. Otherwise, it's essentially a random list. For example, if you had a list of five sources using "South Tyrol", I could create a list of six sources using "Alto Adige". You then could create a list of seven "South Tyrol" sources, which I could counter with an eight-source list for "Alto Adige", and on and on until we ran out of sources. And what do we do with the ones that use both? The only way we can "prove" that "South Tyrol" is more common is if there is a source out there that says explicitly, "South Tyrol is more common than Alto Adige in English", or something to that effect. I understand your concern about other editors, but I think there was enough evidence shown during the last move request that "South Tyrol" is more common (ngrams, Google Books, etc.), that we can leave that statement as is, and point doubters to those proofs.
2) I was actually thinking that a separate article on the history of "Alto Adige" - as district, department, and province - would be a good idea. I'll see if I can work something up - or anyone else is also free to do so.
3) And yes, Mai-Sachme, as far as I know it was just two. I put "various" more or less as a weasel word, since I haven't found a source saying it was exactly two. Dohn joe ( talk) 17:19, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
The previous layout of a simple "Name" section is better than these two confusing subsections "English-language usage" and "Local and official usage". Subsections are warranted if they are long enough in text, and that is not the case. Best to revert to the previous format of having just one section. Gryffindor ( talk) 03:37, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Folks here may be interested to know that Gryffindor and I have been working on a new article about the historical district and department of Alto Adige/Haut-Adige/Upper Adige. We're having trouble picking the right title for the article, though. Check out the discussion at Talk:Haut-Adige and weigh in if you're interested. Thanks! Dohn joe ( talk) 17:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Okay, folks. Let's get down to the NPOV and the UNDUE tags currently in the article. Since there are two tags, I'll ask two questions.
Hopefully we can get to the bottom of this and remove the tags soon. Dohn joe ( talk) 00:03, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
WHAT A SHAME! ALTO ADIGE is in Italy, don't forget it... Un altoatesino. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.46.249.211 ( talk) 14:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I still disagree. 1) The NPOV tag is due to the fact that the term "South Tyrol" is used twice as much in English as the term "Alto Adige" [33]. Having it in bold in the intro gives it undue weight. 2) The part which mentions the usage of "Sudtirolo" in Italian should be moved further up where the term "South Tyrol" is explained. Gryffindor ( talk) 22:13, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
This map shows the Ladin municipalitites coloured in blue. The legend of the map in the section Demographics, however, says that a Ladin majority is shown by the colour orange. Can anyone fix this contradiction? I don't know how to find the right code for the colour appearing in the map. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 11:40, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
The neutrality of the article is STILL disputed, even if some Austrians want to erase the tag. The article should be named ALTO ADIGE/SOUTH TYROL. Even because it is an area that is inside Italy and there it is a huge Italian speaking community in Alto Adige (that in Bolzano it is even the majority!).An Italian "altoatesino" born in Bolzano. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.208.127.65 ( talk) 14:41, 8 September 2011
Move requests have been brought up here and here. -- Mai-Sachme ( talk) 19:37, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Alto Adige/South tyrol is a geographic area, in this voice is about the Autonomous province of Bolzano -- Pava ( talk) 00:21, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
The results are out: [34], the pdf attached to the press release [35] lists all the details for all the villages and cities. noclador ( talk) 12:46, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
The article states that Austria and Italy ended their dispute with an autonomy agreement in 1992. It would like to point out that (as the article states previously, albeit in somewhat cloudy wording) the autonomy agreement dates back to the year 1972 while it took 20 more years to resolve the dispute. -- Mampfus ( talk) 19:28, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
The article at its current state reads:
I demand this to be changed to: the opinion it was created from a portion, etc. I do not understand why Ascoli inventing the phrase: Venezia Giulia is a clear, hateful example of Italian irredentism, while the poor and civilized Austro-Bavarian shepherds of Alto Adige claiming it to be an integral part of a long-gone County are simply assessing their rights against the bad, bad Italians.
Moreover:
Finally:
All these changes I've been making have been reverted twice, and I've been asked to produce them here on the talk page. So I've done. I expect inputs. -- 80.181.225.114 ( talk) 13:38, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
It's a clear insult against every native South Tyrolean to the "Italian" names "Merano" and "Bolznao" in English instead of the correct German names Meran and Bozen for these two cities.
The "Italian" town names in South Tyrol are not really Italian. In fact, they are pure phantasy names invented by a fascist criminal called Ettore Tolomei, for the "Ialianziation" of South Tyrol. These names are also an insult for Italy's language and rich cultural traditon. In fact, even the original Italian name for South Tyrol - "Sudtirolo" was banned by Mussolini in favour of the fictional "Aldo Adige". No one should be able to see anymore that this area has never really been part of Italy, but has been illegally (i.e. against the populations will) annexed after World War I. Tolomei worked on a whole catalog to replace virtually every German and Ladin geographical name in the area with an Italian one. Due to this fact, these new "names" are on the same level with communist phantasy "town names" like Stalingrad, Kaliningrad, Leningrad, Karl-Marx-Stadt or Ho Chi Minh City.
Using these fictional names in English instead of the original German and Ladin ones is like a posthumous glorification of Mussolini and his crimes against humanity!
I agree with the anon user however that the name should be Meran, and not Merano. The majority of the population speaks German and we have established the rule to name the cities after the language spoken by the majority. That article needs to be moved. Gryffindor ( talk) 05:57, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
This has been discussed for years and the current names reflect the consensus. I'm in full support of using the names of the majority of the population, which means using German for most municipalities but Italian for Bolzano. Merano is a tricky case. It is split almost equally between speakers of German and Italian. The policy in this case has been to use Merano because it is by far the more common name used in English. So just as we say Rome instead of 'Roma and Florence instead of 'Firenze', we use Merano as it is common English usage. Jeppiz ( talk) 13:34, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Probably, at least I hope, it's a topic that's already been raised quite a few times. If it hasn't, here's the point: no Italian speaker, at least among the mentally healthy, would ever call this province Sudtirolo. Moreover, the reported IPA spelling of this word - with /tt/ instead of /dt/ - is wrong, quite laughably in a manner that (somehow) suggests the author of the introduction handling German phonetics better than the Italian one. Sometimes you might hear the adjective sudtirolese, but still it's rather odd, altoatesino is definitely dominant between Italians, and Provincia di Bolzano is the only alternative name of the area which gets used, beyond Alto Adige. Even the local native speakers of German, while speaking Italian, tend to use the Italian names of the province and its towns. I suggest rewriting the whole first paragraphs, I would do it myself, if I weren't sure somebody would revert it in a few hours with no given reason. Nothing to say about the English name, sincerely, it doesn't concern nor interest me. Greetings, -- 79.25.51.160 ( talk) 22:32, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
The bias against italians in this wiki article is outrageous. The authors forgot to mention the violent germanisation to which this region and its inhabitants were subject during the centuries. The history of this region doesn't start in 1922 with the birth of Fascsim. Maybe it should have been remembered that the prevalent german speaking population is the result of centuries of forced germanization and migration of population from Austria and South Germany in a territory placed in the italian peninsula and inhabited by people culturally latin.
Meeting of the Council of Ministers of 12 November 1866 Emperor Franz Joseph.
12th november 1866
“ Se. Majestät (Franz Joseph I.) sprach den bestimmten Befehl aus, daß auf die entschiedenste Art dem Einflusse des in einigen Kronländern noch vorhandenen italienischen Elementes entgegengetreten und durch geeignete Besetzung der Stellen von politischen, Gerichtsbeamten, Lehrern sowie durch den Einfluß der Presse in Südtirol, Dalmatien und dem Küstenlande auf die Germanisierung oder Slawisierung der betreffenden Landesteile je nach Umständen mit aller Energie und ohne alle Rücksicht hingearbeitet werde. Se. Majestät legt es allen Zentralstellen als strenge Pflicht auf, in diesem Sinne planmäßig vorzugehen ”
“His Majesty has expressed the precise order that we decisively oppose the influence of the Italian element still present in some Crown lands, and to aim unsparingly and without the slightest compunction at the Germanization or Slavicization – depending on the circumstances – of the areas in question, through a suitable entrustment of posts to political magistrates and teachers, as well as through the influence of the press in South Tyrol, Dalmatia, and the Adriatic Coast.”
Magnagr ( talk) 03:23, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Please take a "piece" of "bias" or what is missing, suggest here what should be, with sources, and let's talk. -- Robertiki ( talk) 18:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on South Tyrol. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
I know the issue was already discussed here. Nevertheless, I find it quite silly that of the over 100 provinces of Italy, there are two that do not follow the naming convention Province of X (Bolzano Alto-Adige / Bozen Südtirol and Trento). This goes against WP:NCCS, which ironically brings as an example exactly the provinces of Italy. Mind that this is not a politically motivated rant and that seeing Trentino instead of Province of Trento irritates me just as much if not more. From the outside, it looks as if Wikipedia can't distinguish between the official names of administrative subdivisions and the brand names that those same administrative subdivisions use worldwide to market their touristic industry. -- Japs 88 ( talk) 14:08, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
The history section of this article is unbalanced with nothing prior to the 20th century issues around transfer to Italy. The history section should give a balanced overview of the regional history across the centuries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.184.88 ( talk) 12:54, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
I started a discussion at
Talk:List of political parties in Italy/Archive 1#Regional presidents in infoboxes on whether the two provincial presidents of Trentino ans South Tyrol should be equated to regional presidents, as it already happens in the Conference of Regions and Autonomous Provinces.
Please have a say! --
Checco (
talk)
06:54, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
A nationalist IP keeps changing the article against the established consensus of using the local name first. So the question is quite simple: should we stick to the established consensus of using the local name first or should we always use German first as its the majority language? Using Italian first because it's the national language, as the IP claims, is not really an option as it's contrary to established practice across Wikipedia (we don't use Dutch names for French parts of Belgium, German names for French parts of Switzerland, etc.). Jeppiz ( talk) 11:30, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
This page has a wrong name; names of italian 'regioni' and 'province' are written in the Italian Constitution; please fix it as soon as possible! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.30.200.163 ( talk) 18:51, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
The name is correct! It is simply crazy to think that the name of an Italian / Russian / German region in the ENGLISH wikipedia has to be written in Italian / Russian / German: the name of the page for Germany is indeed "Germany", not "Deutschland"!-- Federicolo ( talk) 08:36, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Dear users, for a university workshop I'm inserting a little paragraph regarding Transhumance in the Culture section. I really hope you appreciate my contribution. I wish you all an happy new year! -- ADunibg ( talk) 17:03, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, I've been having absolutely outrageous difficulties in linking the appropriate article ( Coat of arms of Tyrol) for the CoA image in the infobox. Can someone link this for me? Sincerely, a noob who's bad at editing. Theodore Christopher ( talk) 01:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Mai-Sachme: both these terms are used in current English as adjectives plus Tyrolese means the Tyrolean people. For example, see the Collins dictionary entry for Tyrolese. And according to Ngram Viewer, "the Tyrolese" is now more common than "Tyroleans". I'd say both are entirely current, neither is wrong but Tyrolese has the edge when referring to the Tyrolean people. Of course, it's only used in that context. Bermicourt ( talk) 13:40, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
I think that we should change the name of Merano in Meran here, since per Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(geographic_names) in South Tyrol we should use the denomination of the language of the linguistic majority. This implies also a move of Merano to Meran. There could be an exception only if in the English sources Merano prevails over Meran. Alex2006 ( talk) 17:03, 4 November 2021 (UTC)