![]() | 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 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
From the article: "National motto: One for all, all for one". Could you provide us with a source for this other than Alexandre Dumas? -- User:Docu
ah, but I suggest the latin is enough. otherwise, we'd need to give the motto in all four official languages, which would be over the top for something so obscure (only the romands seeming to have any awareness of it at all) dab 20:14, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Interesting reading, though I'm not quite convinced by [1] mentionned above, but, before debating this further, I supppose I should be writing an article about the " Federal Palace". -- User:Docu
Switzerland definitely has no official motto. See discussion (in German) under www.wikipeda.de ("Schweiz"). -- R. L. 20:21, 19 Jan 2006
I see that I missed some edits on the page about the motto, but since it was not accompanied by a discussion on this talk page, I thought I'd just repeat some of the points made in the edit summaries:
Now I forgot to mention that the federal administration did reply, very quickly, to my request for documentation mentioned aboved. Unfortunately, by the time I received the documents, I had not much time for Wikipedia anymore, so I never used them. And of course, right now, one year later, I have a hard time finding them (or even remembering the details);-(. I will keep looking (I know I have them). In the meantime, I think the different links above are still a strong indication that the motto is indeed correct. As far as my understanding of German goes, the discussion on the German Wikipedia does not really give arguments to the contrary — please tell me if I am mistaken here.
Reisio: sorry for having been slow to write this entry, but I was checking in my emails to see if the people from admin.ch gave me any indication (there was none, everything is in the written documentation). But re-reading this section, it is my feeling that the consensus was in favour of the motto, and that new discussion should be required to justify a change, not to justify the status quo of the article as it was in early December. Schutz 23:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
So I have found the documents that were sent to me last year by the Department of defense, protection of the population and sports. The letter is signed by someone from the history department of the Federal Military Library. Here are the documents that I received:
The most interesting document is without doubt the A4 page. It indicates links to Arnold Winkelried and the battle of Sempach, but, interestingly, seems to indicate that it is not linked to Alexandre Dumas. Now, unfortunately, my German is not good enough to understand the details without using a good dictionary. On the other hand, I have re-typed the page as a text file, but can not post it on Wikipedia for copyright reasons. What I can do, though, is send an email to the person who sent me this documentation, and ask for permission to post/modify the text. In the meantime, I can send it privately to people who are interested, if you leave a message on my talk page, or (preferably) if you contact me through the Wikipedia "Send an email" link. It'd be good if a native German speaker could summarise it quickly. We'll see where to go from there. Schutz 22:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
In der englischsprachigen Wikipedia wird unter "Switzerland" behauptet, das offizielle Motto der Schweiz sei "Einer für alle, alle für einen". Stimmt dies? Wenn nicht, bitte löschen. Danke. W. Tell 2.11.2005
Das ist wohl eher das Motto der "Drei Musketiere" ;-) --Tschubby 18:33, 2. Nov 2005 (CET) Das ist natürlich korrekt - wer mal ins Bundeshaus geht, der sehe an die Decke in der Eingangshalle: Unus pro omnibus - omnes pro uno. Das ist aber nicht das offizielle Motto, wie in den USA (e pluribus unum) wo der Spruch - soweit ich weiss - Teil des Wappens ist. Man kann das also schon so stehen lassen. Ich würde aber die lateinische Form bevorzugen. --Sidonius 13:25, 3. Nov 2005 (CET)
Ich muss dir leider widersprechen: Das "Unus pro omnibus" etc. darf nur stehenbleiben, wenn man die von dir erwähnten Tatsachen auch in den Artikel schreibt. Alles andere leistet nur der Verbreitung von Irrtümern Vorschub. Die Schweiz hat nun mal, wie du selbst sagst, kein Nationalmotto wie z.B. Frankreich Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité. Es genügt ja nicht, dass im Bundeshaus wo was draufsteht. Sonst könnte man auch den Spruch Hominum confusione et Dei providentia Helvetia regitur nehmen; der ist doch noch viel bekannter. Also wenn schon, dann ganzen Artikel reinstellen, der die Frage klar beantwortet. --Seidl 13:59, 3. Nov 2005 (CET) Ich würde das ja gerne korrigieren, finde aber auf der englischen Seite über die Schweiz kein entsprechende Behauptung. Entweder wurde das schon gelöscht oder ich bin blind. Nach der History wurde jedenfalls schon seit einigen Tagen nichts mehr verändert. Vielleicht kann W. Tell das ja selber korrigieren.--Sidonius 17:35, 3. Nov 2005 (CET) Danke. Auf der englischen Seite steht unter der Fahne "Motto". Bis gestern war das Motto selbst abgedruckt, seit heute heisst es "none". Wenn man auf "none" drückt, kommt die alphabetische Liste der Mottos, und dort ist es immer noch drin. W. Tell 3.11.2005. Das ominöse Motto ist nun weg. W. Tell 15.11.2005
Clearly, Switzerland never had an official motto. R. L. 12/23/2005
Interesting coincidence; I just found today in a Swiss magazine a picture of an image dating from 1874, with title Gedenkblatt zum 19. April 1874. It represents a statue of Ms (Mrs ? Dame ?) Helvetia, with the Swiss flag on top, and the flags of the Cantons around the page. Below Helvetia is a plate saying Revision der Schweiz. Bundesverfassung, and below that, you guessed it, the sentence Einer für alle, alle für einen is carved in the stone. Unfortunately, it is very small and I don't have a scanner available. Again, this is not something that says officially "this is the motto, and it has been official since bla and bla", but it seems that it can be found at many places where you would expect an official motto to be. Schutz 22:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
I am very impressed on the depth of the discussion on the national motto of Switzerland. I read the whole discussion and I noticed that the german wikipedia was quoted several times as a source. On the german page of switzerland we decided not to mention the motto, because it is no official motto. This decision depends on your definition, what a motto of a country really is or wether it must be part of the constitution etc. Since the motto is not part of any swiss constitutional document or law (see source of the Federal Court) there is no motto for the german wikipedia. (a rather formalist approach) I don't want to mess with your business, but I think you should write "unofficial motto" instead of just "motto" under the coat of arms. Sidonius 11:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Could we please add, ""Schweizerpsalm" (German) "Cantique suisse" (French) "Salmo svizzero" (Italian) "Psalm Svizze" (Romansh)", to the National anthems section? Blangland ( talk) 20:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 15:25, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Switzerland has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Putting the language IPA as a footnote in the bolding title. — 216.49.130.5 ( talk) 23:03, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Switzerland is clearly Central European country in all famous great Western encyclopedias like E. Britannica, German Brockhaus and French LaRousse LaGrande etc.... We don't need to care about references some scholars own books, because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, thus it must rather follow the determination of other encyclopedias than the books of individual writers.-- Pharaph ( talk) 10:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
We don't need to care about references...Of course we need to care about references. See our Wikipedia:Verifiability policy and the Wikipedia:Reliable sources guideline. And the UN, for one, classifies Switzerland as "Western". But it's not likely to be profitable to argue about this here; our own Central Europe article goes on at length about the various classification schemes for Western/Central, so I think it's impossible to find some definitive conclusion to resolve the issue here. — JohnFromPinckney ( talk / edits) 14:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
UN categories still use old cold war era terms, when Europe was divided into communist and capitalist countries by the iron curtain. It lasted only for 40 years. According to most organizations of UN, Central Europe does not even exist, making Europe the only continent of the Globe, which does not even have a central part. However, what is more relevant and important, UNESCO (which is the scientific and cultural organization of the UN) rejected and revised that backward cold war era terms, and it uses the Central Europe term even for Switzerland. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22central+europe%22+switzerland+site%3Aunesco.org&ei=jBw8ZJDHMcqF9u8PyrWWmAM&ved=0ahUKEwiQvY7V467-AhXKgv0HHcqaBTMQ4dUDCA8&uact=5&oq=%22central+europe%22+switzerland+site%3Aunesco.org&gs_lcp=Cgxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAQA0oECEEYAVDeEVjNLWD7MmgBcAB4AIABQ4gB7geSAQIxN5gBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
-- Ősterem ( talk) 16:07, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
The article is unencyclopedic. Wikipedia must follow the basic statement in the led of "switzerland" articles of ALL famous great Western Encyclopedias (let it be French English German spanis or Italian language), which are define Switzerland as Central European country. ALL OF THEM.
In such beginning basic statement that a country is located in XY part of a continent in the LEAD of the article, Wiki had to follow the consensus of the great encyclopedias (as encyclopedical consensus) instead of the statements/opinion of some individual authors in various books. Of course you can and must use the references of books in the body of the text to support the statements of the text, but please do not use them for such very basic statement in the beginning of the lead.-- Pharaph ( talk) 09:25, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Everybody could start a reference war (it is not edit war) I can collect 2000 book references from Google Books searcher to support the Central European Switzerland idea, and you can collect 2000 references of backward cold war era thinkers (where Central Europe term does not even exist on the map!). That's why I said that individual authors of books in this regard are not relevant in the LEAD of the article, if the encyclopedic consensus does not support that at all. You can (and must) use book references from of individual authors to support all sentences in the body text, but please, the most basic info in the LEAD must more based on encyclopedic consensus.
--
Pharaph (
talk)
10:34, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Why didn't Germans not invade Swiss in WW2? 102.46.158.75 ( talk) 03:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
The second paragraph of the introduction says that the major cultural and economic centres of Zürich, Geneva and Basel are located on the Swiss Plateau. This is of course not correct what concerns Basel. I don't know if the original writer wanted to mention Bern instead. (I preferred writing this here instead of directly editing because it's quite a major article still.) 217.64.242.138 ( talk) 12:35, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
This article has 2 environment sub-sections which need to be merged (one is under the "geography" sub-sectionand the other under "education and science").. Swiss romulus ( talk) 13:23, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
In the Federal state section of the article it says:
"It came with the expectation of serving the Holy See, and the Swiss were still obliged to serve Francis II of the Two Sicilies with Swiss Guards present at the siege of Gaeta in 1860."
However, according to Foreign soldiers in the risorgimento and anti-risorgimento : a transnational military history of Germans in the Italian armed groups, 1834-1870 (page 175-176):
"After the “revolt of the Swiss” on 15 May 1859 in Naples, the Swiss formations were dissolved that August, and the soldiers were left the option either to return home or to stay in southern Italy. The formally “Swiss” regiments were replaced at the end of 1859 by new “foreign regiments”. The ranks were filled by those Swiss soldiers that had chosen to stay and by newly arrived recruits, mostly from Austria and southern German states."
So were the Swiss obliged to serve the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies at the Siege of Gaeta or not? Howard 🌽33 18:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Is British English the best and most appropriate choice for most Swiss pages? Iljhgtn ( talk) 01:18, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
No doubt there was a French control over Switzerland between 1798 and around 1813. But in order to put that information in the infobox, we need to have reliable sources. The date 5 March 1798 (beginning) is plausible, but needs to be sourced. The date 7 August 1815 (end) is in my opinion far-fetched and almost certainly wrong (much too late), and a very probable earlier date also needs to be sourced. Sapphorain ( talk) 20:12, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Can detail be added on how the various cantonal govermental organs ( cantonal legislatures & executives) relate to one another? It does not appear they are vertically integrated as the Federal Assembly and Federal Council are. Are the elections of both organs held at the same time in parallel elections? Does this mean that its possible to have a cantonal legislature controlled by a different party than that which controls the cantonal executive? Criticalthinker ( talk) 12:36, 10 November 2023 (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 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
From the article: "National motto: One for all, all for one". Could you provide us with a source for this other than Alexandre Dumas? -- User:Docu
ah, but I suggest the latin is enough. otherwise, we'd need to give the motto in all four official languages, which would be over the top for something so obscure (only the romands seeming to have any awareness of it at all) dab 20:14, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Interesting reading, though I'm not quite convinced by [1] mentionned above, but, before debating this further, I supppose I should be writing an article about the " Federal Palace". -- User:Docu
Switzerland definitely has no official motto. See discussion (in German) under www.wikipeda.de ("Schweiz"). -- R. L. 20:21, 19 Jan 2006
I see that I missed some edits on the page about the motto, but since it was not accompanied by a discussion on this talk page, I thought I'd just repeat some of the points made in the edit summaries:
Now I forgot to mention that the federal administration did reply, very quickly, to my request for documentation mentioned aboved. Unfortunately, by the time I received the documents, I had not much time for Wikipedia anymore, so I never used them. And of course, right now, one year later, I have a hard time finding them (or even remembering the details);-(. I will keep looking (I know I have them). In the meantime, I think the different links above are still a strong indication that the motto is indeed correct. As far as my understanding of German goes, the discussion on the German Wikipedia does not really give arguments to the contrary — please tell me if I am mistaken here.
Reisio: sorry for having been slow to write this entry, but I was checking in my emails to see if the people from admin.ch gave me any indication (there was none, everything is in the written documentation). But re-reading this section, it is my feeling that the consensus was in favour of the motto, and that new discussion should be required to justify a change, not to justify the status quo of the article as it was in early December. Schutz 23:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
So I have found the documents that were sent to me last year by the Department of defense, protection of the population and sports. The letter is signed by someone from the history department of the Federal Military Library. Here are the documents that I received:
The most interesting document is without doubt the A4 page. It indicates links to Arnold Winkelried and the battle of Sempach, but, interestingly, seems to indicate that it is not linked to Alexandre Dumas. Now, unfortunately, my German is not good enough to understand the details without using a good dictionary. On the other hand, I have re-typed the page as a text file, but can not post it on Wikipedia for copyright reasons. What I can do, though, is send an email to the person who sent me this documentation, and ask for permission to post/modify the text. In the meantime, I can send it privately to people who are interested, if you leave a message on my talk page, or (preferably) if you contact me through the Wikipedia "Send an email" link. It'd be good if a native German speaker could summarise it quickly. We'll see where to go from there. Schutz 22:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
In der englischsprachigen Wikipedia wird unter "Switzerland" behauptet, das offizielle Motto der Schweiz sei "Einer für alle, alle für einen". Stimmt dies? Wenn nicht, bitte löschen. Danke. W. Tell 2.11.2005
Das ist wohl eher das Motto der "Drei Musketiere" ;-) --Tschubby 18:33, 2. Nov 2005 (CET) Das ist natürlich korrekt - wer mal ins Bundeshaus geht, der sehe an die Decke in der Eingangshalle: Unus pro omnibus - omnes pro uno. Das ist aber nicht das offizielle Motto, wie in den USA (e pluribus unum) wo der Spruch - soweit ich weiss - Teil des Wappens ist. Man kann das also schon so stehen lassen. Ich würde aber die lateinische Form bevorzugen. --Sidonius 13:25, 3. Nov 2005 (CET)
Ich muss dir leider widersprechen: Das "Unus pro omnibus" etc. darf nur stehenbleiben, wenn man die von dir erwähnten Tatsachen auch in den Artikel schreibt. Alles andere leistet nur der Verbreitung von Irrtümern Vorschub. Die Schweiz hat nun mal, wie du selbst sagst, kein Nationalmotto wie z.B. Frankreich Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité. Es genügt ja nicht, dass im Bundeshaus wo was draufsteht. Sonst könnte man auch den Spruch Hominum confusione et Dei providentia Helvetia regitur nehmen; der ist doch noch viel bekannter. Also wenn schon, dann ganzen Artikel reinstellen, der die Frage klar beantwortet. --Seidl 13:59, 3. Nov 2005 (CET) Ich würde das ja gerne korrigieren, finde aber auf der englischen Seite über die Schweiz kein entsprechende Behauptung. Entweder wurde das schon gelöscht oder ich bin blind. Nach der History wurde jedenfalls schon seit einigen Tagen nichts mehr verändert. Vielleicht kann W. Tell das ja selber korrigieren.--Sidonius 17:35, 3. Nov 2005 (CET) Danke. Auf der englischen Seite steht unter der Fahne "Motto". Bis gestern war das Motto selbst abgedruckt, seit heute heisst es "none". Wenn man auf "none" drückt, kommt die alphabetische Liste der Mottos, und dort ist es immer noch drin. W. Tell 3.11.2005. Das ominöse Motto ist nun weg. W. Tell 15.11.2005
Clearly, Switzerland never had an official motto. R. L. 12/23/2005
Interesting coincidence; I just found today in a Swiss magazine a picture of an image dating from 1874, with title Gedenkblatt zum 19. April 1874. It represents a statue of Ms (Mrs ? Dame ?) Helvetia, with the Swiss flag on top, and the flags of the Cantons around the page. Below Helvetia is a plate saying Revision der Schweiz. Bundesverfassung, and below that, you guessed it, the sentence Einer für alle, alle für einen is carved in the stone. Unfortunately, it is very small and I don't have a scanner available. Again, this is not something that says officially "this is the motto, and it has been official since bla and bla", but it seems that it can be found at many places where you would expect an official motto to be. Schutz 22:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
I am very impressed on the depth of the discussion on the national motto of Switzerland. I read the whole discussion and I noticed that the german wikipedia was quoted several times as a source. On the german page of switzerland we decided not to mention the motto, because it is no official motto. This decision depends on your definition, what a motto of a country really is or wether it must be part of the constitution etc. Since the motto is not part of any swiss constitutional document or law (see source of the Federal Court) there is no motto for the german wikipedia. (a rather formalist approach) I don't want to mess with your business, but I think you should write "unofficial motto" instead of just "motto" under the coat of arms. Sidonius 11:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Could we please add, ""Schweizerpsalm" (German) "Cantique suisse" (French) "Salmo svizzero" (Italian) "Psalm Svizze" (Romansh)", to the National anthems section? Blangland ( talk) 20:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 15:25, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Switzerland has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Putting the language IPA as a footnote in the bolding title. — 216.49.130.5 ( talk) 23:03, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Switzerland is clearly Central European country in all famous great Western encyclopedias like E. Britannica, German Brockhaus and French LaRousse LaGrande etc.... We don't need to care about references some scholars own books, because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, thus it must rather follow the determination of other encyclopedias than the books of individual writers.-- Pharaph ( talk) 10:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
We don't need to care about references...Of course we need to care about references. See our Wikipedia:Verifiability policy and the Wikipedia:Reliable sources guideline. And the UN, for one, classifies Switzerland as "Western". But it's not likely to be profitable to argue about this here; our own Central Europe article goes on at length about the various classification schemes for Western/Central, so I think it's impossible to find some definitive conclusion to resolve the issue here. — JohnFromPinckney ( talk / edits) 14:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
UN categories still use old cold war era terms, when Europe was divided into communist and capitalist countries by the iron curtain. It lasted only for 40 years. According to most organizations of UN, Central Europe does not even exist, making Europe the only continent of the Globe, which does not even have a central part. However, what is more relevant and important, UNESCO (which is the scientific and cultural organization of the UN) rejected and revised that backward cold war era terms, and it uses the Central Europe term even for Switzerland. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22central+europe%22+switzerland+site%3Aunesco.org&ei=jBw8ZJDHMcqF9u8PyrWWmAM&ved=0ahUKEwiQvY7V467-AhXKgv0HHcqaBTMQ4dUDCA8&uact=5&oq=%22central+europe%22+switzerland+site%3Aunesco.org&gs_lcp=Cgxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAQA0oECEEYAVDeEVjNLWD7MmgBcAB4AIABQ4gB7geSAQIxN5gBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
-- Ősterem ( talk) 16:07, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
The article is unencyclopedic. Wikipedia must follow the basic statement in the led of "switzerland" articles of ALL famous great Western Encyclopedias (let it be French English German spanis or Italian language), which are define Switzerland as Central European country. ALL OF THEM.
In such beginning basic statement that a country is located in XY part of a continent in the LEAD of the article, Wiki had to follow the consensus of the great encyclopedias (as encyclopedical consensus) instead of the statements/opinion of some individual authors in various books. Of course you can and must use the references of books in the body of the text to support the statements of the text, but please do not use them for such very basic statement in the beginning of the lead.-- Pharaph ( talk) 09:25, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Everybody could start a reference war (it is not edit war) I can collect 2000 book references from Google Books searcher to support the Central European Switzerland idea, and you can collect 2000 references of backward cold war era thinkers (where Central Europe term does not even exist on the map!). That's why I said that individual authors of books in this regard are not relevant in the LEAD of the article, if the encyclopedic consensus does not support that at all. You can (and must) use book references from of individual authors to support all sentences in the body text, but please, the most basic info in the LEAD must more based on encyclopedic consensus.
--
Pharaph (
talk)
10:34, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Why didn't Germans not invade Swiss in WW2? 102.46.158.75 ( talk) 03:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
The second paragraph of the introduction says that the major cultural and economic centres of Zürich, Geneva and Basel are located on the Swiss Plateau. This is of course not correct what concerns Basel. I don't know if the original writer wanted to mention Bern instead. (I preferred writing this here instead of directly editing because it's quite a major article still.) 217.64.242.138 ( talk) 12:35, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
This article has 2 environment sub-sections which need to be merged (one is under the "geography" sub-sectionand the other under "education and science").. Swiss romulus ( talk) 13:23, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
In the Federal state section of the article it says:
"It came with the expectation of serving the Holy See, and the Swiss were still obliged to serve Francis II of the Two Sicilies with Swiss Guards present at the siege of Gaeta in 1860."
However, according to Foreign soldiers in the risorgimento and anti-risorgimento : a transnational military history of Germans in the Italian armed groups, 1834-1870 (page 175-176):
"After the “revolt of the Swiss” on 15 May 1859 in Naples, the Swiss formations were dissolved that August, and the soldiers were left the option either to return home or to stay in southern Italy. The formally “Swiss” regiments were replaced at the end of 1859 by new “foreign regiments”. The ranks were filled by those Swiss soldiers that had chosen to stay and by newly arrived recruits, mostly from Austria and southern German states."
So were the Swiss obliged to serve the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies at the Siege of Gaeta or not? Howard 🌽33 18:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Is British English the best and most appropriate choice for most Swiss pages? Iljhgtn ( talk) 01:18, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
No doubt there was a French control over Switzerland between 1798 and around 1813. But in order to put that information in the infobox, we need to have reliable sources. The date 5 March 1798 (beginning) is plausible, but needs to be sourced. The date 7 August 1815 (end) is in my opinion far-fetched and almost certainly wrong (much too late), and a very probable earlier date also needs to be sourced. Sapphorain ( talk) 20:12, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Can detail be added on how the various cantonal govermental organs ( cantonal legislatures & executives) relate to one another? It does not appear they are vertically integrated as the Federal Assembly and Federal Council are. Are the elections of both organs held at the same time in parallel elections? Does this mean that its possible to have a cantonal legislature controlled by a different party than that which controls the cantonal executive? Criticalthinker ( talk) 12:36, 10 November 2023 (UTC)