Talk:Silvio Berlusconi/Archive 1

message: * - Wikipedia:BLPN#Silvio_Berlusconi#
This has now been raised at the BLP noticeboard, see WP:BLPN. PatGallacher (talk) 21:30, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose - Totally unnecessary provocation. T. trichiura Infect me 21:43, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: What exactly is being provoked? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:04, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: BLPN

message: Im not sure if this is appropriate so I decided to ask first. Considering the recent conviction of the scientists over the earthquake, would it be useful to add a comparison section, just to make note of the seeming imbalance of legal issues involving them? Because its a pretty hard to ignore issue (that is, scientists being sentenced to six years for not predicting an earthquake, vs. someone commiting an actual crime.) Of course, any section would be fully sourced. 
If this isn't the right place for such a thing, that's fine too. I just don't want to bother looking for those sources until I know.  74.132.249.206 (talk) 09:54, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless there are published sources making that sort of comparison, the answer is no.  To see why, have a look at WP:OR.  Thanks for the suggestion, but I doubt this is going anywhere.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 12:39, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The phrase "for not predicting an earthquake" here above, is inaccurate (and false in logical terms): they have been sentenced for "predicting that there was no earthquake" (in other word, the sentence states that they did a prediction (although negative), in a context where no predictions are possible).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.117.184.32 (talk) 21:58, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

text: Also, the tile is misleading: No one had been arrested. It was just a 1st grade sentence.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.117.184.32 (talk) 22:02, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The arrested scientists 

message: A German WDR radio journalist who said he was present during Berlusconi's speech to the earthquake victims remarked in a radio show that Berlusconi's "camping weekend" quote was taken out of contex by the media. When Berlusconis said that, he was expressly and specifically adressing the children among the victims in an attempt to cheer them up. Said journalist was rather critical of Berlusconi otherwise, but in this particular instance the said Berlusconi was treated unfairly. I think the article should include this clarification, but it's apparently protected at this time. 87.164.179.46 (talk) 14:55, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blunder: Earthquake victims should consider it "camping" 

message: Among "Honours and awards" there is one from "House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies". But that house, and Two Sicilies Kingdom is no more a country since 1860! Instead it seems missing the "Distinguished Statesman award" conferred by the jewish US-based "Anti-Defamation League" in 2003. On the Memory Day, commemoring Shoah victims, in january 2013, Berlusconi was sympathetic with fascist regime: . Mmm, well... --147.162.48.1 (talk) 11:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good point 147.162.48.1 (talk) about the "Honours and awards"   House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies: Knight Grand Cross of the Sacred Military Constantinian Order of Saint George. Well the adjective "borbonico" has still a double meaning in Italy for "out of date": who knows, maybe it's a title of honor that has "endochronic properties" just like "resublimated Thiotimoline". (please note the citation needed template).   M aurice   Carbonaro  18:55, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:   Honours and awards 

message: See Talk:Silvio Berlusconi underage prostitution charges#RM. Please reply there. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:58, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move proposal for connected article 

message: Surely it's time to add "and convicted criminal" to the first para of the intro? His conviction has been upheld by the Court of Cassation and there's no further appeal. Malick78 (talk) 09:51, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't there a more precise term? Fraudster maybe? Iluvatar85 (talk) 16:46, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

text: Either "fraudster" or "convicted criminal" would do now. If the sentence for "exploitation of underage prostitution" will also be upheld, "fraudster" will not be enough --Purple74 (talk) 12:14, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. I went for a rather specific "tax evader", I hope it's not deemed too euphemistical. --Nemo 13:58, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

text: I assume you mean former PM: no he isn't, Arnaldo Forlani being the most relevant precedent recalled (implicitly) by Giorgio Napolitano (he served a couple years of social services in early 1990s).  --Nemo 15:52, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "and convicted criminal"? 

message: 93.56.98.201 posted this comment on 2 February 2013 (view all feedback).
This article needs some more truth. Even people who hate Berlusconi should have enough honesty to at least report facts correctly and not hide facts that are unpleasant for them. For instance, anti-mafia public prosecutor Grasso recently praised the last Berlusconi government for its anti-mafia laws. Too unpleasant to be reported?
Any thoughts?
Trinitresque (talk) 17:54, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that that praise was given does not itself justify its inclusion into this article. If we added every praise a subject receives to each article, we might end up with articles many times their current lengths. There should be a separate reason why something like this merits inclusion in my opinion. Trinitresque (talk) 17:54, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reader feedback: This article needs some more... 

message: On , I'd ask the user to provide better sources for the claim. In this very moment the committee is discussing 3 "pregiudiziali" which would exclude any application of the "Severino law". I suspect the editor is confusing the Severino law decadence with the public offices ban, which is not yet active because its length needs to be recalculated by the court after it was canceled by the Court of Cassation. Nemo 16:39, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, you are correct. Just checked the story. I relied on a normally well respected Danish source, who had mixed it up. Indeed the Senate Committee right now only focus on application of the "Severino law". So we have two paths potentially leading to a Senate expulsion: "Severino law" and "Court ruling". As I have understood the situation, the supreme court already decided to grant a public office ban for Berlusconi, but returned the duration question (if it should be either 3 or 5 years) for the lower court to judge. I suspect, that even if the Senate committee decides not to expel Berlusconi based on the Severino law, they will still have to expel him (one way or the other) based on the court ruling. I look forward to learn how it all unfolds. Danish Expert (talk) 05:53, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: On a sidenote: Cesare_Previti is an excellent precedent case to observe how a similar public office expulsion was conducted in 2007. The Italian supreme court had given him a lifetime ban from holding public office on 4 May 2006, but he did no withdraw as a deputy, and appealed the supreme courts decision to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The house then voted to expel him on 31 July 2007 (by a similar voting process as Berlusconi now face). And finally ECHR ruled on 19 January 2010, that his appeal was declared inadmissible. The interesting point to note, is that it took ECHR 3.5 years to rule his appeal was inadmissible - and that the house did not wait to receive the ECHR decision before voting to expel him. With that in mind, I don't think Berlusconi will succeed by his current attempt, to sway the Senate committee to postpone taking any decision until after his appeal has been heard by ECHR. Danish Expert (talk) 07:34, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I may be confused and I've not checked so don't trust me, but the public offices ban applies (automatically) only at the next election; at a minimum it needs to be "ratified" by the same Giunta (committee) to cause a decadence. At the same time there is also a third line of decadence in the same Giunta, i.e. that he didn't have the right to stand as a candidate in the first place because of a 1954 law on holders of public contracts (TV). So there will be a series or court rulings and votes by the committee and the full Senate before this is over. I'm not sure if you want to detail all this somewhere; I personally don't and I'd just leave some generic language till the events unfold. --Nemo 11:14, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree we should not list full details about all the Senate committee votes in advance. It is better we instead await the outcome, before writing about it in full detail. Still, the framework of what is going on in the Senate committee and the political ramifications, is something that remain interesting shortly to report, so I just added a short paragraph for this purpose. When the final outcome of the Senate deliberations are known, I of course accept the paragraph can be cooked down and rewritten only to reflect the main conclusions. Danish Expert (talk) 14:12, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:   Giunta delle elezioni e delle immunità parlamentari 

message: The Berlusconi's front picture of the article is aged (2010). I propose to update it.
46.255.85.34 (talk) 09:10, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sadly he no longer is in office so there are less official photos nowadays and we don't have many on Commons (additionally, Flickr is down now and Google finds nothing). I found only two suitable options (to be cropped), see right side. Suggestions? --Nemo 11:17, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Nick.mon reverted the update , so ask him. --Nemo 18:10, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:   Aged picture of Silvio Berlusconi  

message: RJFF has tagged the article as being too long with a need of subarticle spinoff or condensing. Nick.mon removed the tag, and I agree with him that the tag is not needed. The article might contain certain chapters with a need to be condensed, but then I think you should add "too long chapter" tags for each of those chapters, rather than tag the article as being too long in general. I also think, that a long article with many summary chapters (as we already have now), is actually something most readers will expect to be presented to in Berlusconi's case, when considering he has been a top politician for 25 years, implicated in almost 30 court cases, and inarguably is one of the most important business people in Italy. Danish Expert (talk) 04:24, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Just removed the "too long article" template posted by RJFF for the second time. See my previous reply above for argumentation. To move the debate further ahead, I still invite RJFF to use the  tag-template for each section he considers to be too long, rather than tagging the entire article as a whole. Danish Expert (talk) 16:11, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article too long? 

message: I can guarantee that Berlusconi according to new surveys, has a capital of 11 billion €. Forbes does not say right.I can not edit the page in English, I can only edit pages in Italian.--Giuseppe luci (talk) 18:22, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Please provide a source for your claim. We cannot say Forbes isn't right just on our opinions or faith assumption among users. : Per favore forniscici una fonte per la tua affermazione. Non possiamo dire che Forbes non è corretta solo sulle nostre opinioni o su assunzioni di fiducia fra noi utenti. [Rispondi in inglese se riesci]--Nickanc (talk) 15:15, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Money 

message: I think that this fact "The latest example of this in Italy, was when the leader of the Five Star Movement, Beppe Grillo, led his party's 2013 election campaign despite being banned from public office due to a conviction over a road accident." is non correct.
The Severino Law (decreto legislativo n.235 of 31 december 2012) on article 1, paragraph c) state that manslaughter (omicidio colposo in italian) is not affected.
Beppe Grillo on his blog wrote  that he was convicted for "omicidio colposo" for a road accident at 1 year and 3 months.
A more compliant example of the application of this law is the case of regional councillor Michele Iorio,  that was banned for 18 month. — Mauri75 (talk) 19:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example of Severino Law effects on politician 

message: Please change "The latest example of this in Italy, was when the leader of the Five Star Movement, Beppe Grillo, led his party's 2013 election campaign despite being banned from public office due to a conviction over a road accident." beacause is non correct.
The Severino Law (decreto legislativo n.235 of 31 december 2012) on article 1, paragraph c) state that manslaughter (omicidio colposo in italian) is not affected.
Beppe Grillo on his blog wrote  that he was convicted for "omicidio colposo" for a road accident at 1 year and 3 months.
A more compliant example of the application of this law is the case of regional councillor Michele Iorio,  that was banned for 18 month.
I suggest to change to "The first example of this in Italy, was when the councellor 
Angelo_Michele_Iorio has be banned from public office due to a conviction 
Mauri75 (talk) 19:47, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Partly done: you're right, the CNN article is not accurate enough: Grillo refused to run for elections because of a rule established within his party (and not as a consequence of the Severino law). However, IMO the comparison should be made with a leader who led his party despite being banned from public office, and I just know Grillo in this situation. I changed the sentence this way:«A similar situation occurred in March 2013, when the leader of the Five Star Movement, Beppe Grillo, convicted over a road accident in 1988, led his party's 2013 election campaign despite he couldn't run for a public office because of a rule established within his movement.»Hope it's OK for you, — TintoMeches, 02:43, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 29 September 2013 

message: Just want to bump a note, that after reading several articles this month, it appear there is no actual difference between the two type of public office bans existing in Italy. This Foglio article has clarified, that the only difference is that they are imposed independently by two parallel authorities. The court imposed public office ban is an "additional penalty" related solely to the arbitrated case; while the Severino law imposed public office ban is a standard penalty being activated by the "Administrative Authoraty" for persons being finally convicted of aggravated crimes. The main conclusion is, that the longest of the two imposed public office bans by effect will supersede the shortest. So in the tax evasion case, the six-year ban from the Severino law will supersede the two-year court imposed ban. While if it ends with a court imposed lifetime public office ban in the Ruby case, then this lifetime ban will supersede the shorter Severino law public office ban. For activation of both types of public office bans against active parliamentarians, the ban will only take effect from the date when the parliamentarian's house has passed the ban. Danish Expert (talk) 11:37, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any difference between the two public office bans sanctioned by the Court and Severino Law? 

message: See this article from ANSA: http://www.ansa.it/web/notizie/postit/decadenza_berlusconi/2013/11/26/Speciale-Decadenza-Berlusconi_9683972.html213.215.136.158 
(talk) 17:00, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berlusconi has been expelled from the Italian Parliament 

message: Does "US" belong in this sentence? None of the references clarify if "US" belongs in the sentence. "Later, at the summit's official dinner hosted by President Giorgio Napolitano, US and Libyan leaders upset protocol by sitting next to Italian Prime Minister and G8 host Berlusconi. (According to protocol, Gaddafi should have sat three places away from Berlusconi.)[117][118][119]" (Bold added.) Raquel Baranow (talk) 06:11, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence doesn't make sense 

message: Berlusconi didn't resign from the title of Cavaliere. Firstly he "self-suspended" himself (that's different!). Secondly, he self-suspended himself not from the Title (that should be done by the President of the Republic), but just from a private association of people qith that title. He is still Cavaliere, a kind of owner a House in a luxury neighborhood leaving the association of the owners: he still owns the house.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.34.9.71 (talk) 12:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cavaliere (Knight) 

message: Berlusconi has founded a political party with the approval of the Cosa Nostra - The Italian Mafia..
He gave money to the Mafia for protection providing liquids useful for the development of the same mafia organization that killed Falcone and Borsellino.
Has impoverished the country. He has made one of the most shameful tax fraud in Italian history (and for what has been thrown out by the Senate).
Cristianizzo (talk) 14:49, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 26 April 2015 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Silvio Berlusconi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130922105228/http://www.articolo21.info/499/editoriale/berlusconi-tv-un-impero-nato-per-decretocraxi.html to http://www.articolo21.info/499/editoriale/berlusconi-tv-un-impero-nato-per-decretocraxi.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131102113356/http://giornaleonline.unionesarda.ilsole24ore.com/Articolo.aspx?Data=20090330&Categ=1&Voce=2&IdArticolo=2336849 to http://giornaleonline.unionesarda.ilsole24ore.com/Articolo.aspx?Data=20090330&Categ=1&Voce=2&IdArticolo=2336849
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130919222652/http://www.camera.it/412?idSeduta=535&resoconto=stenografico&indice=alfabetico&tit=00020&fase=00020 to http://www.camera.it/412?idSeduta=535&resoconto=stenografico&indice=alfabetico&tit=00020&fase=00020#sed0535.stenografico.tit00020.sub00020
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130209005712/http://www.care2.com/news/go/671026 to http://www.care2.com/news/go/671026
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140517123905/http://www.agi.it/english-version/italy/elenco-notizie/200909221932-pol-ren0047-berlusconi_ministers_not_to_respond_to_questions_on_gossip to http://www.agi.it/english-version/italy/elenco-notizie/200909221932-pol-ren0047-berlusconi_ministers_not_to_respond_to_questions_on_gossip
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:41, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Looks like vandalism. EvilFreD (talk) 13:40, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually it's true. 151.20.1.111 (talk) 17:36, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if it is true it isn't encyclopedic. __209.179.86.123 (talk) 17:57, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Angela Merkel 

message: Currently at the end of Family background and personal life is this sentence: "In May 2009, Lario announced that she was to file for divorce." Since that's six years ago, I'm going to go out on a limb and declare that is way out of date. Especially since the very next sentence (in a new paragraph?) continues with, "On 28 December 2012, Berlusconi was ordered to pay his ex-wife Veronica Lario $48 million a year in a divorce settlement that was filed Christmas Day, and he will keep the $100 million house they live in with their three children." First off, was it really filed on Christmas Day - a holiday? The statement also implies that he and the now ex-wife will continue to live together. That doesn't sound right. And while whoever is correcting this, delete the earlier sentence, "By this time, Berlusconi was a well-known entrepreneur, and his wedding was a notable social event. One of his best men was Bettino Craxi, a former prime minister and leader of the Italian Socialist Party." It shouldn't be there and just looks silly. Who writes this stuff?
Also, In the photo of Berlusconi addressing the US Congress, the other people should also be identified. From left, it should read Vice President Dick Cheney and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert. __209.179.86.123 (talk) 17:55, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  A couple of corrections needed 

message: What is his middle name? "Word is(KKDavid CIA)he used Alfred for theft including the fake English accent. Also the ^Why can't we call him Mussolini^ TV broadcast by _______  
Also the Chloeduet are you a real person on the new account page was really obese bill Alfred cute ;-)
Impose Cures Obese-Riches (talk) 21:59, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 22:32, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2016 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Silvio Berlusconi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20151118193419/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpNx5-9ZOyQ to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpNx5-9ZOyQ
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:28, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: with regard to this edit, I suppose I can let it rest as long as the information about being the third-longest in service is still there, and linked to the full list, so the facts are still there; but I want to put it on record that this strikes me as the sort of PC-for-PC's-sake "NPOV" rather than true WP:NPOV.
Nobody was comparing Berlusconi's actions to Mussolini's (or for that matter, Giolitti's), but the article merely stated that Berlusconi had the longest term for a prime minister after those two very prominent historical figures.
Besides, you argue in your edit summary that there is no mention of Giolitti at the start of Mussolini's article; well, that's true, but aside from that not meaning much, the lede of the Mussolini article does say : shall we consider that a POV-slur against Renzi?
Where does it end? At no person's article ever mentioning another person if it is a slut to compare those two people in any respect (even benign ones like age or length in service) in some editors' minds?
LjL (talk) 12:08, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Longest term after Mussolini and Giolitti 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 14 external links on Silvio Berlusconi. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://elezionistorico.interno.it/liste.php?tp=C&dt=27%2F03%2F1994&cta=I&tpEnte=A&tpSeg=C&numEnte=0&sut1=&sut2=&sut3=&descEnte=&descArea=ITALIA&codTipoSegLeader=
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/article/0%2C13005%2C901030707-461792%2C00.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0%2C1518%2C583212%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150215045214/http://www.globes.co.il/en/article-1000725663 to http://www.globes.co.il/en/article-1000725663
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ilgiornale.it/esteri/frattini_piano_otto_punti_balcani/05-04-2009/articolo-id%3D341698-page%3D0-comments%3D1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090616155752/http://www.ansa.it/site/notizie/awnplus/english/news/2009-06-09_109379246.html to http://www.ansa.it/site/notizie/awnplus/english/news/2009-06-09_109379246.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/276995%2Cleadall-g8-summits-sets-seal-on-obamas-new-diplomacy.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/276995%2Cleadall-g8-summits-sets-seal-on-obamas-new-diplomacy.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/2003/05/05/intini-no-alle-leggi-ad-personam.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-6350957/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5mb3JlaWducG9saWN5LmNvbS9hcnRpY2xlcy8yMDEwLzA3LzE2L21hcnJpZWRfdG9fdGhlX21vYg%3D%3D
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.theguardian.com/Archive/Article/0%2C4273%2C4183973%2C00.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.avvenire.it/boffo/boffo%2Bdimissioni_200909031239587930000_200909041332052000000.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0%2C8599%2C2042595%2C00.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.quirinale.it/elementi/DettaglioOnorificenze.aspx?decorato=632
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:46, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Silvio Berlusconi. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130605005441/http://www.i-italy.org/35892/letta-seeks-slim-and-sober-cabinet to http://www.i-italy.org/35892/letta-seeks-slim-and-sober-cabinet
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111023202548/http://www.silvioberlusconifansclub.it/ to http://www.silvioberlusconifansclub.it/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040809235211/http://www.ketupa.net/berlusconi2.htm to http://www.ketupa.net/berlusconi2.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.giannivattimo.it/menu/libro_berl.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:49, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I would like to ask Checco and Autospark (who are among the most active users in the articles regarding Italian politics) if it isn't better to keep the link to the List of Prime Ministers of Italy in the infobox. Because Nikkimaria edited all the articles regarding Italian PMs, deleting the links to the list, writing, for example, "50th Prime Minister of Italy" and not "50th Prime Minister of Italy" as we used for years. -- Nick.mon (talk) 16:59, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: That formatting is deprecated. See the documentation for Template:Infobox officeholder as well as the Manual of Style for linking. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:40, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  50th Prime Minister 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Silvio Berlusconi. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090618080801/http://www.alarabonline.org/english/display.asp?fname=2009%5C03%5C03-02%5Czbusinessz%5C988.htm&dismode=x&ts=02%2F03%2F2009%2004%3A42%3A49%20%C3%A3 to http://www.alarabonline.org/english/display.asp?fname=2009%5C03%5C03-02%5Czbusinessz%5C988.htm&dismode=x&ts=02%2F03%2F2009%2004%3A42%3A49%20%C3%A3
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120508103401/https://www.forzasilvio.it/ to https://www.forzasilvio.it/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:15, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This sentence in the first section sounds pretty nNPOV to me: "Berlusconi is famous for his populist political style and brash, overbearing personality. In his long-time tenure, he was often accused of being an authoritarian leader and a strongmanSì, Berlusconi è un dittatoreLa Boschi insulta Berlusconi: "Ha esperienza da dittatore""What a Trump America Can Learn from a Berlusconi Italy"". I have removed the third reference since it doesn't state anything about it, while the other two are absolutely not enough to support the whole paragraph. The former is a blog hosted on a (relatively minor) newspaper website (with well known political positions), while the latter refers to an half sentence said by a member of the Democratic Party --Tia solzago (talk) 22:38, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Since no one replied, I have removed the sentence --Tia solzago (talk) 22:04, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You waited less than a week, you should have tagged it instead. I reinstated the sentence because they do appear to be reliable and it would be hard to argue that they're wrong (is he not a populist?). I do agree better sources should be used though. Prinsgezinde (talk) 21:41, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: We can discuss about the "populist political style" (even if "populist" is an adjective that in Italy is currently used for other parties), but the second sentence needs more and better (i.e. NPOV) sources now. I don't know if you understand Italian and can read the references present, but as I wrote above they are inadequate. If Berlusconi must be classified as an authoritarian leader and be put in the same list as, for example, Putin or Erdogan, it should not be a difficult task to find them, otherwise the sentence must be reformulated or removed --Tia solzago (talk) 13:41, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence in the first section 

message: This article is now considerably changed from some time ago.  Can someone point out any specific NPOV problems?  I think it's now at the level where critics of the page have to be quite specific about what is wrong if they want to sustain the POV argument.  I don't think it's completely brilliant yet, but at least what is missing (some policy aspects) is now clear.  So guys what's wrong with it now?Azikala 16:49, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: My post dated 19 Jul is prior to the last edit. I agree that the article is now more balanced and more informative, even if, in my opinion, the emphasis given to the legal investigations is still excessive, particularly if compared with articles of other politicians. Marius 06:11, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that..   It seems that work on this article was worthwhile.  Some sections are still marked as stubs (his policy section, for example).  If these are expanded then the Legal section will shrink relatively and you will be happier. I will remove the NPOV notice tonight some time after 1800 UTC today (barrning other comments)  Azikala 06:57, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV again

message: :I for one am in disagreement. All the circumstances quoted in the criticism section have factual basis (sometimes video evidence, viz. the Schulz incident). Concerned parties can insert equally factually based positives about Mr. Berlusconi's tenure (assuming they can find them).
:I must also note that the the concept that the Italian Government "imposes" lagislation is nowhere to be found in the article text (which actually uses words such as "presented" and "pushed through").
Alien_Life_form July 7, 2004
:Correct, but please look the Page History and check the content of the article before my post in this discussion page. For instance Revision as of 01.37, 4 Jun 2004 the phrase ' the Italian Parliament' was replaced by 'his government majority'. Consider also the tenor of the other statements that were introduced before the page was reverted as considered POV.
:Again, one thing is a fair political debate in which everyone can tell his own opinion, something else is the acrimony against a political 'enemy'. I don't like Mr.Berlusconi very much but I respect the vote of my fellow citizens.
And I like democracy. I hope that the (anonymous) Berlusconi's criticizers like it as well.
Regards, Mario_
Marius 19:05, 7 Jul 2004
I am also in favour of democracy, I am not anonymous, but I have had comments deleted by anonymous persons:-) Berlusconi **is** a very contrversial person, and he puts a lot of effort into promoting his image, it is all part of his style. It would be evidently wrong to ignore this controversy, just as it would be wrong to say that any critisism of him is partisan. It would be POV to say that his economic policy has flopped without adding in the figures to back it up, but it is not POV to highlight eg. his long legal battles which started before his entry into politics, they are simple facts whose dates back themselves up.
At the end of the day Democracy depends on free speech, and much critiscism of Berlusconi revolves around the fact that he appears to have forgoton this. I think the editing of this page represents Berlusconis approach to the press and media in general, any critisicm is partisan and biased and therefore should be eliminated. In a democracy the plethora should be able to see all, and decide themselves what to believe. Only blatent lies and abuse should be tackled. Perhaps the same should be true of this page.
:Deleting comments from discussion pages is wrong, of course. The article now deals in detail with either controversy and legal investigations, so they're are not ignored. If you have other facts to add, add them. Everyone is innocent until it's proved he's guilty. IMO as soon as a new legal sentence concerning B.will be issued then it'll be factual and should be added to the article, specifying if it is an acquittal or a conviction. In Italy the criticism against Berlusconi can be freely expressed as Italy is a democratic country. Saying that B. has full control of the italian media is pure disinformation (see the article). In Italy the political system grant to all minorities the right to express themselves (prove the contrary, if you are able). IMHO an encyclopedia is not the right place for either supporters or opponents to express their POV. %) Marius 21:55, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looks factually based to me 

message: I suggest to remove this page completly as it's clear it is edited only by partisans anti-Berlusconi.
They are also very ignorant as they don't know that the laws in Italy are always approved by the Parliament and not imposed by the Government.
Mario__
:Mario, we've got several people on here who agree with you, including myself.  I don't know enough about Italian politics to write it though.  So give it a fix.  Start from scratch if you want.  Good luck! Stargoat 13:22, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: the last two sections were done before extensive editing.  I think they should be treated as completed unless they are renewed with more specific comments Azikala 16:49, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: If Berlusconi's supporters do not use Wikipedia (or read for that matter) it's not anybody's fault. The majority of Berlusconi's voters have little or no educational background, and Berlusconi knows this very well. Berlusconi's party, Forza Italia, heavily utilizes terminilogy stemming from football terminology: i.e.  people affiliated to his party are called "azzurri" (like the Italian football team). If you like to read some pro-Berlusconi's comments please refer to www.forza-italia.it, there are plenty of them. Wikipedia, being and encyclopedia, would not have much following, I am afraid, among Berlusconi's supporters.
Vschwager 13:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page is getting more and more unbalanced 

message: In the "Influence on the media" iI've changed the position of template because the first sentences are neutral how you can see in the statistics. It isn't our task to judge them. --Ilario 15:05, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: nNPOV section

message: He may/may not be the Prime Minister of Italy for much longer but he will remain in his post at least until the election of a new President in mid-May 2006. Can we retain the use of "current" and not "former" PM in the first paragraph of the article until(or if) there is a change of government?? In the interests of fact and not supposition.
--Kingsbury 18:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silvio's Current Status 

message: Ceasar: "The Ides of April have come for Silvio old man."
Old man: "Aye, but not gone!". 
--Lacatosias 09:51, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ides of April: 

message: I've deleted the term "infamous" for the concentration camps :en:Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid. All concentration camps were infamous not only those of fascists. --Ilario 17:56, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Please NPOV

message: In the frame at the top right it stands:
27 April 1994 —22 December 1994
And in the bottom frame it stands:
Prime Minister of Italy
1994–1995
Dl 10:05, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Term of office 

message: I'm a bit surprised that the ~150 page glossy brochure he/his party produced advertising him which was criticised by Bono for misusing his image doesn't appear to have been mentioned Nil Einne 22:05, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glossy brochere 

message: Just read this at EUbusiness—should probably be included in the article, but I'm not sure where exactly...? Help appreciated. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:53, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  News tidbit 

message: I move that LEGATVSLEGIONIS stop posting on this discussion board, because his contributions are all absurdly biased and unsubstantiated opinions. Oldkinderhook 18:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: LEGATVSLEGIONIS

message: Now that many agree that the article should be rewritten in a NPOV, we should outline how shall we proceed with this, without leaving anything out and using reputable sources, and citing the sources. Maltesedog 11:00, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I think that the article needn't be rewritten from scratch, but the disputed sections should be amended. I don't see such a big consensus as you said... --Lou Crazy 23:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree - in my opinion, a step-by-step process would be the best route to follow. I would also point at the BBC as a reliable source of information: no links unless necessary, of course, but their BBC News online service maintains good coverage on the subject of Berlusconi, his profile as a Prime Minister/VIP, and excerpts of his speeches. Might be worth checking here and there, since it's already featured in the Italian version of his profile. --Dark Schneider 11:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I rewritten the intro trying to reach NPOV. I know it's long but hopefully some parts of the controversy issues will eventually be moved to separate articles so in the end the whole article will be shorter... possibly... however the article about Tony Blair is 80kb long, it's not that this article is so terribly long, it's just very poor and biased, and unfortunately it has become much worse since the last time I read it months ago. Massimamanno 6:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have done minor edits to this version of the intro (as I previously did to other sections) but only to improve the English. It still does not seem very encyclopedic and the assertions about the left and right POVs are vague and general rather than well supported. And, even in Italy, the issues are not L<>R. The summary surely needs to attempt to flag later more detailed explanations about why he is such a controversial personaility? A fuller breakdown later about his politics, properly referenced so that the perspectives of all sides are explored (as opposed to characterised almost stereotypically) is still needed to make this article - or articles - more balanced and accurately-informative--farsee50 10:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concensus on NPOV 

message: I can find just some personal opinions and fascinating theories in there. --LEGATVSLEGIONIS
I wrote most of that section. I suppose you refer to the first paragraph, where common point of views of Berlusconi's supporters and opposers are shown: <BR> opposers:
:Some critics argued that Berlusconi did it to take care of his own interests, being saving his own companies from bankruptcy and himself from convictions. 
supporters:
:Instead, Berlusconi's supporters hailed him as the "new man" that was to bring the public bureaucracy to new efficiency and to reform the state from top to bottom; they argued that he was so rich that he would have no interest in using politics to become even richer, and regarding his trials they also argued that just after Berlusconi entered into politics, his opponents tried to get rid of him by a judicial persecution.
It seem to me that those two are very common opinions in Italy, and any italian heard about all of them; I think is necessary to present them, as they are the most spread opinions about Berlusconi. Anyway after these opinions well cited facts are presented: Mediobaca annual report and all investigations of 1992 and 1993. <BR>--BMF81 15:05, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The debate about the motives

message: About this sentence: 
:“There have been harsh criticisms on Berlusconi's choices: the ministry of Health, previously occupied by Girolamo Sirchia, a famous doctor, has been given to Francesco Storace, who, only a few weeks earlier, lost the regional elections in Latium. Another controversial move was the nomination of Giulio Tremonti as Vice-Prime Minister. Tremonti had been the Minister of Economy just few years earlier, but was forced to resign. He is strongly supported by the Northern League, but opposed by UDC and AN.”  
Not a very neutral point of view…maybe u don’t agree with those Berlusconi’s choises, and u’re free to think what u wanna, but that’s absolutely not an objective fact.--LEGATVSLEGIONIS
I agree with you, this has to be reworded.--BMF81 15:09, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In this case, the "fact" is that he was harshly criticised. And this fact is interesting enough to be mentioned. But I agree with BMF81 that it should be reworded. --Lou Crazy 04:04, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Berlusconi III Cabinet

message: This part have to be expanded to include two of important reforms: the reforms of labour and school systems. --LEGATVSLEGIONIS
:Would you write a few words on them? Do it in Italian, I can translate. I would also mention the "testi unici"; while the ordinary citizen doesn't usually see their usefulness, they usually help the affected sector by streamlining the law. --Lou Crazy 04:04, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have put a request for expansion tag instead of an npov one.--BMF81 21:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Legislative actions

message: Irrelevant part..sense of humour is one of the most personal and not objective things on the Earth..and then I remember a lot of funnier jokes than the ones cited in the article. I also think that the jokes cited have been chosen to try to show everyone how unliberal Berlusconi is. --LEGATVSLEGIONIS
:I agree. This is not a paragraph on his sense of humour (which is very personal), but about his ability to insult almost everyone, even when he doesn't want to. It should be renamed appropriately. --Lou Crazy 04:04, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the paragraph is as good as possible: unfortunately Berlusconi really said those phrases, and they need to be written somewhere in the article, not to show everyone how unliberal he is, but to show everyone his personality, and what makes many Italian hate him. Maybe we should rename it!  16:40, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Nobody is saying that he has a bad sense of humour, merely a controversial one. I don't see how this isn't NPOV. It clearly is humour, and even if you find it funny, you'd surely have to admit it's controversial? There are probably people out there who'd think Berlusconi is their dream leader for saying things like that. The section should stay, but perhaps renaming is right. How does 'Controversial Jokes' sound? Doesn't imply that all his jokes/humour are controversial, just the ones listed. And I'm a bit new to wikipedia editing - what would be the right way to start the process of removing the NPOV flag on this section? Imran1985 13:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sense of Humour

message: This section should also talk a bit about the Italian justice and especially how exactly it works (see also what I said about CSM).--LEGATVSLEGIONIS
About italian judges, if you think it is relevant, you can add some sentence in the paper about the fact that Berlusconi said the judges to be politically driven. Anyway, I think it is a personal statement. If you want to state that italian judges are biased, you need some evidence. Since all the international analysts, as far as I know, never said anything about italian judges, you cannot say that as a truth. If you think there are enough indications to write, as a guess, that they are biased, you can start a discussion about that in this page. --Gala.martin
Yeah, u’re right,  I don’t have any evidence, that’s just my personal idea, so i won’t write anything about that on Wikipedia….but maybe those “international analysts” don’t know much about Italy, because half of Italians usually think some judges use their power to attack their political enemy; I could do dozens of different examples, but of course I don’t know if that’s the truth, but it seems the truth….just a question: if an international analyst says that Berlusconi’s daddy was born on Jupiter, can u really think that’s the truth? I believe in the certain prooves, in the facts, and sometimes I’m doubtful about those “international alalysts”--LEGATVSLEGIONIS
* Personally I'm more willing to trust international analysts than gossip that you say "seems the truth." Oldkinderhook 18:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Legal investigations of Berlusconi

message: Another irrelevant and not neutral part.--LEGATVSLEGIONIS
Indeed. However, some of the facts mentioned there ought to be moved elsewhere, because they are very interesting. --Lou Crazy 04:04, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Personality

message: I hereby join the movement which claims that the neutrality of the articles is to be disputed.  There are severe assertations which are disputable, as legatvslegionis said.  I believe, that the article should be rewritten.  Another problem is that the article is longer than desirable accortding to the Wikipedia Policies.
I believe, the article should be written by an Italian, who has complete knowledge of the political arena in Italy, and has the capability to mantain a neutral pov. With the help of other users, potential problems especially with regards to language may be resolved.
Maltesedog 10:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In order to reach consensus and neutrality, when adding an NPOV tag you must cite precises words and sentences that you find not neutral, so everybody can work on it. --BMF81 12:33, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Maltesedog: a rearrangment of the article is needed. If the article is too long, we could divide it: a main article about B.'s life and ideas, and two sub-articles about his business and political career (or even a third sub-article about his troubles with justice). I also agree with the POV tags. For re-writing: any native english available for revisioning? We should also be sure that the re-writers are not in the staff of any italian party, in order to avoid troubles. I can be also available to be one of the re-writers. Gala.martin 15:00, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV dispute

message: I can not even figure out what this sentence is meant to say. Can someone fix it up?
Even if the opposition and some allied parties recognized Berlusconi could not achieve what he promised in the contract, most of his allies agree in finding the reasons of this failure in the unfavourable economical condition Italy is living.
This article is full of typos and bad grammar that need fixing
--222.153.59.189 04:12, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Typos + Grammar

message: This article says nothing about Mr. Berlusconi's private life, past marriages and family. XanaX 14:44, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Private life 

message: I agree with the anonymous who says the article is NPOV. In particular ther paragraph talking about mr.Mangano: it says clearly that Berlusconi is part of mafia. It is absolutely false: a  lot of court sentences said he didn't know that Mangano was a member of the Mafia! If Berlusconi will read this article I think that Wikipedia will get a cause for slander 82.52.64.157 17:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote most of the paragraph about Mangano, so I'm the one to blame if you don't like it :) On a more serious note, I think that you have some problems with language, if you argue that “it says clearly that Berlusconi is part of mafia”. Please read it again and cite its exact phrases. <BR>If you know any court sentence that states that “Berlusconi didn't know that Mangano was a member of the Mafia”, you are more than welcome, as anybody, to add an accurate reference to the article.--BMF81 19:11, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mangano NPOV

message: I'm new to Wikipedia, but I wonder why a so-called "Free Encyclopedia" allows people to write an article like this one. This is clearly not NPOV, but I don't see any lines about it. Reading it, you see only political comments written against Berlusconi (it's funny to read lines where writers describe "good laws" putting, in the end, that the idea comes from "previuos governments"). Do you really think that people can consider Wikipedia a good source of information if you keep articles like this one? It's a shame to keep up this work under an unequal point of view. --82.50.122.195 10:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to be constructive, you should be more precise than that: please cite the exact phrases/words that you consider not true, or not neutral. <BR>Here is my opinion about the only remark you made: it was pretty soft argument for a NPOV dispute; the section you mentioned was not about "good laws" but about "Legislative actions"; I also think that It's important to see facts in an "historical perspective", citing possible relevant works/omissions of previous goverments.<BR>--BMF81 12:44, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My aim wasn't to be constructive, because a "constructive person" would cancel almost the whole text of the article and re-write it under a real NPOV. I just wanted to be sure that I was (and am, in my personal opinion) right: people like the ones who defend such an article are driven by a political ideal and not by the principles of a NPOV. That ideal could be summarized like "I don't like Berlusconi, so I want to let people see him under a bad aspect. If he did something good, it's better to say that doesn't come from him, but he took the idea from somebody who was in the government before him". I do not even like people like Berlusconi, but I would never say I'm neutral while describing him only starting from my own political thoughts. That's all. And you know that's right (even if you will never admit it publicly)..<BR>--82.50.124.61 14:30, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you think it isn't NPOV, add other material telling what he did good. I can't think of anything good he did, but of course there must have been something ;-) On a serious note, the law against smoking was effective, but it has already been mentioned. In other cases... it is a fact that inheritance taxes were abolished by the left wing administration for all inheritances below 400.000 euro (or something like that), which includes almost all inheritances, except for a small percentage of the population, including Berlusconi. Berlusconi abolished it for these people. It is a fact that the driver licence reform was approved by the leftist administration. One day after it entered into effect, the Berlusconi government changed it a bit with a sort of executive order, overriding the parliament. Not just the idea, also the actualization of the idea belongs to the previous administration. He is the only prime minister ever in Italy to assume office with a prior conviction.  And so on. A NPOV means you can't hide these facts. Just mention other facts about any good thing he did. --Lou Crazy 00:50, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV? 

message: Here there is an article that summarizes all the available information about "Money that Berlusconi made with politics, before and after his campaigning". --BMF81 15:58, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing information: money that Berlusconi made with politics

message: One important missing part of this section, is the long debated question about the reasons for Berlusconi entering in politics. Before adding it to the article, I ask for help on writing it in a proper english (some translation from italian is still missing) and making it neutral-POV.<BR>--BMF81 15:32, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Going Down into the Field", revision request

message: From the interview with Michele Sindona (bankrupted P2 member linked with Cosa Nostra and the laundering of Mafia money), made and published by NY Times journalist Nick Tosches:
When asked which banks were used by the Mafia, he replied:
"In Sicily sometimes the Banco di Sicilia. In Milan a little bank in Piazza Mercanti" that is, the Banca Rasini. 
Furtermore (but not currently present in the article), according to the references L'odore dei soldi and multilanguage paper, "Well-known Mafia figures and Sicilian drug dealers held bank accounts at the Banca Rasini, including Antonio Virgilio, Salvatore Enea, and Luigi Monti, who is linked with Vittorio Mangano, the Mafia figure who worked as overseer in Berlusconi's villa".
In the cited interview (, ) of journalist Marco Travaglio, he says that "Banca Rasini [...] was among those banks that were cited by Palermo judges as those used for mafia money laundering" (originally in italian: "Banca Rasini [...] era una delle banche che è indicata dai giudici di Palermo come quelle utilizzate per il riciclaggio del denaro della mafia". <BR>--BMF81 15:12, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further details about the Sources for Banca Rasini and money laundering 

message: I found nothing about this on the internet:
section Racism
Silvio Berlusconi in 1998 accused the United Kingdom of having a poor economy and of having a foul mouthed population who did nothing but drink beer and swear.Because of this act of hatered Silvio was given a formal warning by members of the EU and Tony Blair himself.
by John Nathan, New York, USA
To the anonimus author:Please provide some source.
--BMF81 22:40, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Suspect contribution

message: (I removed the following text from the article as it's not English. I don't really know Italian so I can't tell whether it's of value. If it's of use in the article, could someone translate? --A bit iffy 09:20, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed Italian text

message: IMHO the latest edits about conflict of interest and control of media, done without any discussion in this page on a text which wasn't changed since a long time, in an anti-B and anti-executive Point Of View justifies the  nNPOV advice to be restored. Marius 05:16, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to NPOVize a bit. Again, it is difficult to make it sound neutral when he actually first says one thing and then publicly does the others... but that's the man. --Orzetto 00:45, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate (no joke) your sincerity in owning your mislike about the man. Marius 05:00, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Latest edits

message: I'm not sure this is encyclopedic, so I'm leaving it up to the editors of this article (you) whether it should be included:
A bar of soap made from Berlusconi's fat sold for 18,000 dollars last month.  Here's the news article:. Dave (talk) 04:32, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
Dear Webmaster, I don't want to add anything about this man, but I've to protest against some prejudices you have about Italians. I rubbed out some offensive lines, but someone wrote them again. 1) I NEVER heard that "horns" are a common gesture amoung Italian pre-teens and I NEVER saw it by anyone! It's a very vulgar gesture possibly practiced in old times, when this man was young, but certainly no actual pre-teen or teen ever practice it (or know): boys and girls are too busy in front of PC or in gym or at dancing or in their other school and out-school activities. "Horns" are referred to a far past! 2) Italian youngmen are surely not machos in the way you mean, but only normally males. I read in history books about this kind of boys in the 1950s, but modern youngmen respect women and deal with them like every other European boy. There is NO macho imagine in Italy: maybe you are reffering to the time of emigrants or the times in which Berlusconi was a boy (which is, more or less, the same). I ask you to cancel these lines, offensive for all Italians, who are surely not represented by such a clown.
:It is clear that you left Italy some time ago. I am Italian. 1) Horns are common use among teen and they are not vulgar anymore, much less than the middle finger. Horns in pictures are an evergreen, up to 30-years-old people. 2) It is oviously true that Italians are not all womanizers. However the degree of political corectness is much higher in scandinavian countries. The joke by Berlusconi, however, was considered unpolite also by the Italians and that's why it is reported here. Italians are represented by a "clown", given that they voted for him. --pippo2001 19:17, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You may want to look here: ,, . ;) --pippo2001 19:31, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia is not a place for political debate. The sentence you keep deleting is This is a common joke among Italian pre-teens, and many felt it was utterly out of place in an international meeting. referred to Berlusconi doing corna. People in the rest of the world don't even know what 'corna' are and this sentence is needed to give contest. You may want to ask to a pre-teen about the usage of these gestures, that are not vulgar anymore. Please, restrain any consideration on my social status. Prejudice is very bad, but 'slight' refinements of true are annoying. Take care --pippo2001 12:18, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

text: From what do you infer that I am anti-B (whatever this word means)? I did not edit the original text. The anonymous editor deleted parts necessary to understand what the article is talking about. If you want to add something about politics and programs, whatever yout B status is, please go on. --pippo2001 08:11, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: done (see history). Ciao. --Marius 08:22, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible addition 

message: I've just completed a thorough reading of this article after noticing its NPOV warning and discovered, rather to my delight, that I was unable to find examples of significant POV writing in either direction, for or against him (unless one would like to construe the length at which his legal troubles and criticisms are discussed POV, but I submit that he is a very controversial Prime Minister and he does have an arseload of legal issues, and the fact that so much information exists on these subjects is not our fault). Unless anyone within, say, the next week has an outstanding objection, I see no reason for the POV warning to remain. It is guilty of the reverse of its intention — rather than ensuring questioning and critique of a suspect article, it casts doubt upon a legitimate one. Wally 23:17, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm the user who put the notice, the reason being that, imho, B's grip on italian media is highly overestimated here. However I've no obiection to remove it, given that the NPOV is not, imho again, a black or white issue, and this article can be regarded as NPOV enough. As a final consideration: yes, B has a long judicial history, but here in Italy we've a lot of politicians with similar pedigrees, but B's one has been strongly enphasized by his opponents, for his being in office. Marius @ 06:37, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there still any problem with this page? 

message: What's the problem with including a pronunciation file? (though I prefer  for this) David.Monniaux 12:14, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audio file 

message: Many suspects on his person are risen by his enduring refuse to explain his past: apparently, his empire was founded and developed with money (about 250 millions Euro) coming from nowhere and he never ever explained anything about where that money came from. More, he was part in the last 1970 decade and first '80 years of the freemason lodge "Propaganda 2", a large subversive association aiming to take control over the Italian government. More, in his very home of Arcore, Berlusconi had employed for two years, as stableman, the mafia boss Vittorio Mangano.
* "Apparently" his empire was founded from money coming from "nowhere"? That doesn't make any sense! How can that money come from nowhere? Is this implying that he founded his empire on money that he never disclosed his source? If so, what's the big deal here? If I founded an empire, would I wouldn't necessarily disclose the source of my initial capital, and I'd never gather if from illegal sources. This could be quite innocent. 
* "More, he was part in the last 1970 decade and first '80 years of the freemason lodge "Propaganda 2", a large subversive association aiming to take control over the Italian government." Source? Sounds like a conspiracy theory. 
:He actually got convicted in 1990 by the Venice "Corte d'Appello", with the accuse of "False Witness" about this. He said to the judges that he was not involved in the P2, but it was proven otherwise. It's not a theory, it's history.
:P2 is part of Italian history. You can find a lot about that in any history book about Italy, or in wikipedia itself. And it is sure Berlusconi was affiliated with P2 (you can also find a pictures of his card on www.berlusconisilvio.it ). Some politicians of Berlusconi's party were affiliated with P2 as well. Gala.martin 14:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is illegal as far as Berlusconi knew Mangano was affiliated with Mafia. I do not know the source of the author, but you can find a lot of material about that from "Procura di Caltanissetta". Gala.martin 14:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Berlusconi's character and past

message: I removed this
:"in a public management style reminiscent of a private entrepreneur"
I tried rewriting it as 
:"in a style which XXXX described as being reminiscent of a private entrepreneur"
but I couldn't find any XXXX.  Could someone please provide a link.  I think several descriptions of his style of legislative action have been made.
:Hi Azikala.
:imo you did a great job as the article is now by far better and more NPOV than it was some time ago. I agree to remove NPOV warning, even if, here and there, the anti-B taste re-surfaces. I'm not interested in triggering flames or edit-wars between italians (we've enough on it.wiki!) as I'm not B.'s lawyer and furthermore I see the faults of the guy too. It's evident he pays the scot to be rich, influencial, conservative, and, above all, in office. By sure, when he'll be out, (I guess very soon) all this attention he's subjected to, will fade out. But that's it: it's democracy. A biography is very encyclopedic when the personage is much known, no matter about his real historical relevance. About the micro-POV: you could write:
::in a style which his supporters described as being reminiscent of a private entrepreneur
:By the way: B's opponents too agree he has a private entrepreneur style, but, ironically, they use this very argument to criticize him  :-)  Bye. Marius @ 09:36, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Micro POV removal

message: Yesterday Mr.Berlusconi's portrait has been replaced by a photo of himself and Mrs. Cherie Blair during a summer party.
Ok, political satire is always welcome in democracy, but what has that got to do with an Encyclopaedia?
Personally I like funny-dressed politicians more than thieving and/or tiresome ones anyway. Marius 06:57, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Satirical edits

message: In my opinion the biography of an influent political man inside an Encyclopaedia CAN, and, more then that, MUST, quote also judicial proceedings the politician is subjected to, provided that they are given the appropriate weight in the general context of the article.
In this case the whole Berlusconi's career seems to pivot just around trials and allegations, thus painting the article with an an unmistakable partisan color.
Please look the different way this issue is handled in articles concerning other politicians who had minor or major judicial involvments too (in Italy a could quote Giulio Andreotti, but you have only the embarassment of choosing all around the world).
As a matter of fact the debate around the balance between political and judicial powers is a critical (and very important) issue in the modern democracies, and the issue of the conflict of interests is important as well. 
Very often these issues are used as political 'weapons of mass destruction' in political contests: this is perfectly legitimate (in my opinion) but an article of an Encyclopaedia doesn't seem to me the most appropriate place for them.
As far as it concerns the Berlusconi-the-man personal character I think that, beeing italian voters more than 18 years old, they're able to develop an opinion without beeing plagiarized by some TV-spots.
My personal idea is that Mr.Berlusconi has a fighting and rash character, with the indisputable merit of beeing able to let himself understood by his audience: this is not little in a country where politicians usually speek using an alien language.
By the way: I'm not 'berlusconian'.
Marius 13:31, 19 Jul 2004
	
	This is a problem of language. Too much italians are just political supporters,
	they support parties as they were football teams. You say '...understood by his
	audience' ? Tell us the profile of the majority of this people!
	Aren't those the same people that run in a trip when they are told that
	somewhere in Italy (or abroad) a statue of the Holly Mother lacrimates blood?
	Aren't those the same people that give millions (of old lira, 1E=2000L) to
	the magicians for having better life, find love, win the national lottery etc.
	In Italy we say 'qualunquismo' o 'relativismo assoluto', so many different
	commanders in the history, that italians think - could not be worser -, but
	times have changed and people begin to understand that isn't the same, 
	in spite of growing stupidity in the national media.
	If somebody does not write a good page about -Italian mentality-, many people
	cannot understand this page. The role of the Vatican in Italy too.
	The directive of the church whom to vote (for those prayers that always vote
	those indicated by the church).
	As for the balance political-judicial, you cannot debate over the balance
	with a man & company charged and already condemned.
::my friend, let me say something (no flames please :-) 
::*not all our italian fellow citizen are so deeply learned, intelligent, high-profiled as you probably are, (or you believe you are), but imho it's not a reason why claiming they're stupid children unable to understand politics.
::*I don't believe to Holy Mother's lacrimations too, but I respect people who believe them. Democracy is also to respect your neighbour's ideas even if (let me say particularly if) they're different. In dictatorships the problem doesn't exist as everyone think the same way, and all Saints, Holy Mothers, Magicians, Lotteries and other stupid stuff like these is banned by law.
::*if you want to write a wiki page about italic temper, do it, just be carefull to keep NPOV, as we are an encyclopedia, not a political forum.
::*semantic issue: when I wrote I'm not berlusconian I meant I don't vote Forza Italia (the Berlusconi's party, for non italian politics aware Wikipedians). I don't vote at all since 20 years and I think I'm not partisan. You can be partisan, but you can't use wikipedia for deploying your beliefs.
::*if you're interested in contributing to the new article of Silvio Berlusconi on it.wiki, jump here and partecipate to the discussion. All contributes are welcome, and in the discussion pages you are not compelled to be NPOV, of course. Bye. Marius @ post 06:56, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you have profoundly misunderstood. The anomympus editor who posted that comment was not suggetsing that ALL Italian are idiotic, superstious, and empty-headed sheep, but only that Berlusoni supporters are idiotic, superstitious, authoritaian and empty-headed sheep. Now put the remarks in context please: my friend above is only a private citizen referring to a certain (admittedly very large) part of the Italian population. Berlusoconi, who is the PRIME MINISTER of the F**** Nation referred to all of those who do not vote for him as "coglioni!!" As the Guardian correctly represented this expression in English, he called them dickheads. Coglioni literally means "balls" of course. But that does not come close to accurately portraying the extreme vulgarity, arrogance and offensiveness that Berlusoni intended to convey with this expression. "Dickheads" is about right. Why isn't this represneted in the article? It's extremely POV to leave it out, I should think.
Imagine if Geoger W. Bush or John  Kerry called his opponent's supporrtes a bunch of "losers" or even "idiots" and the reaction that would have followed from that. He would have dropped yto abut 2% of the vote. Also, one of Berlu's major acheivements is not mentioned: he changed the electoral law three months before the election!! Imagine if,in the US ot UK, the majprity governement decided to rewrrite the Costituotion three months before the election so as to esnsure that they would have a grrater chance for victory. Sickening!! And what about the famous "Kapò" statement with recpet to the German foreign minister. Are you going to whitewash that as well. I don't have time to get to all the ad personam laws which are not mentioned here but occupied about the first three years of his regime.--Lacatosias 09:38, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Different ways of dealing

message: Gianfranco, pretty all the sources I can find indicate Berlusconi is the wealthiest man in Italy, Consider this from the Forbes site: http://www.forbes.com/static_html/bill/2002/print/rank.html which puts him at 600 million more than the next Italian. In addition The Economist regularly refers to him as the richest Italian.
:Dear Mark, Gianni Agnelli ("Mr. Fiat" - #180 in the list of the page you indicated), together with the members of his family, owns litterally thousands of companies that in turn own houses, cars, boats, helicopters, planes, shops, factories and really any other valuable good, all recorded as separate property of each company, in 5 Continents on 5; maybe then that Forbes cannot consider him the wealthiest man in Italy, because it records only official personal incomes the way they are declared to tax office. But I would wait a minute before considering he's poorer than our homo novus or than other folks there listed.
:This kind of datum, the official declaration to tax office (this is a general rule), would not be a concrete indication in our country, since we are usually very... "shy" about our incomes ;-)))
:So, my deep esteem for the two papers you mentioned remains unaltered, but I can tell you that I cannot assume those data as effectively describing italian positions on more than a "partial", perhaps formal aspect.
:As a common practice, here we evaluate a patrimony upon the number of companies that belong to or are otherwise controlled by the main holder company, up to fourth grade and yes, we do this way because we know that our tax office will not be receiving the veritable truth about our money, but perhaps... a more pleasant interpretations of economical facts.
:Moreover: the same tax administration uses similar indexes and effectively does not take into the least account what personally one declares. An alternative index is number of employees or involved workers. Fiat in Italy is a state within the state.
:Mr. Del Vecchio, with only a dozen relevant companies, is indeed very high in that ranking, but it is quite difficult to consider that his groups is more important than Benetton's and that respective personal fortunes are not proportionally in a different sequence. 
:So, you'll have noticed that I didn't say who was the wealthiest one; I just said that Berlusconi is, for sure, one among them. Any italian could not proof it, but would immediately tell you. :-)))
:BTW, the owner of one of most important european car factories, declared to tax office that he only owns 12 Fiat "Fiorino" pick-ups (see ) for the staff gardening in his villa. He says he has no other cars but 12 Fiorinos. Funny people these italian tycoons, one of these days I'll have to become one, I like pick-ups!
:Seriously, I would perhaps keep the note on a more general tone, despite the not discussed prestige of sources. We are dealing with some data that are not enough "scientific" to describe a precise scheme the way we are used to read here.
:Ciao --Gianfranco 
::I have changed the article a little to state this in terms of the source, i.e. forbes. You're right in that it's impossible to get an accurate net worth of these people. I'm sure all of these men you mention spend a considerable amount of time understating the value of these assets! I enjoyed reading your note! -- Dze27
::: On the other hand, there is no reason to believe that Berlusconi doesn't own assets and companies which are under his family members' names too. Vince In Milan 10:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that Berlusconi is far enough the richest man in Italy, at present. And any reasonable way of evaluating worth, would rank Berlusconi as the richest man in Italy (the number of employees is not a reasonable estimate of personal worth; this is due to the fact that one generally owns shares of companies that own shares of companies that own shares.........). Forbes is considered a good source of this kind of estimates, so I think it was a good idea to cite it. 
It would be interesting to have a chart (or somethink similar) of Berlusconi's worth in the last years. In fact, this article is not precise about that, and looks like more biased than it is. Gala.martin 00:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Analysing Wealth

message: Has Berlusconi taken over as PM yet? It`s been a while since the election. --Oddeivind (talk) 08:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Or at least if he has, it's rather stunning that Corriere della Sera has not seen fit to make it a big headline (I've been scanning the headlines recently, not so much reading the stories in depth -- check it out at http://www.corriere.it, if you can read a little Italian). --Trovatore (talk) 08:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The correct term for the next week or so is 'Italy's Premier-elect Silvio Berlusconi'.  Shortly, the text may resume the wording used rather prematurely before it was, with pedantic rectitude, contested as inappropriate to this interim.Nishidani (talk) 08:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no such thing as a "premier-elect". --Trovatore (talk) 16:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Yes, of course, I know. I just thought it was strange that it takes som much time before he takes over. --Oddeivind (talk) 15:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Very few English speakers are likely to count the outcome of a cabinet reshuffle as a new term in office, even if you can argue that it legally is. We should say that he's been PM twice before, but with a note about the cabinet reshuffle. That's what I've done. --Trovatore (talk) 18:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it really anyone that count a cabinet reshuffle as a new time as prime minister?? As long as he remains in office without a break, that is clearly one single term in office. Thus, he will now be a PM the third time.  --Oddeivind (talk) 14:21, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I don't know about the "without a break" formulation -- I think if there's a new parliament, even without a different PM, I would probably count that as a separate term. --Trovatore (talk) 17:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

text: It will be the fourth cabinet, but that is not necessarily the same thing as Berlusconi's fourth time in office. --Trovatore 20:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

text: What article is that? As far as I know, there is no article called history of Italian cabinets or history of Italian governments or list of Italian cabinets or list of Italian governments. Nope, they all came up red. What we do have is a list of prime ministers of Italy. Prime ministers, not governments. This will be, by the way most people are going to be counting, the third time Berlusconi has been prime minister, even if it's technically his fourth government. --Trovatore (talk) 15:51, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Yes, I was referring to the article list of prime ministers of Italy (the title too is uncorrect, because in the Italian Constitution there isn't the idea of "Prime" minister). Moreover the count is uncorrect (you can verify it at the link to Governi Italiani) and it doesn't matter if abroad the most of people don't know how we count the Presidents and their cabinets. The most of Italian Wikipedians write "perchè" instead of "perché", but not for this reason "perchè" becomes correct. Paolotacchi (talk) 07:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear Therequiembellishere, there is a big difference between Italy and the United Kingdom. Every time that a PM forms a new government there are a new oath of office and a vote of confidence in Parliament, so that only at that point the new term starts. Italian PM is a very weak figure: he cannot fire his ministers and thus reshuffle the cabinet. --Checco (talk) 11:23, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

text: 8 of May, when he did the oath in front of the President of the Republic who named/elect him. Paolotacchi (talk) 21:53, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is he PM now? 

message: I just heard on the news (BBC) that Berlusconi has taken over as prime minister, but according to the information here on Wikipedia he toook over on the 8. of May. What is the correct date? --Oddeivind (talk) 06:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: 8 of May, when he did the oath in front of the President of the Republic who named/elect him. Paolotacchi (talk) 21:53, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exact date? 

message: Does anyone know what his views on the European Union are? I think this should be part of the article, especially with the upcoming vote on the Treaty of Lisbon. I would appreciate if someone added this to the article. Thank you. Artur Buchhorn (talk) 21:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I can only tell you that the general consensus is that SB doesn't have any views on most things beyond his business calculations, but is ready to accommodate every view, depending on necessity, political lobbies etc. His major ally, the Northern League, was historically opposed to the E.U., since it wants regional devolution along the lines of Catalan. Under the influence of Giulio Tremonti, the economist, who was against the E.U. in the 90s but has now changed tack, the E.U. will be supported for (1) its potential as a legislative and economic block to put pressure on fair trade, perhaps tariffs on esp.Chihnese goods, and (2) for stricter immigration laws and collective border policing of the Mediterranean. Whether they join America ('I agree with American policy even before it has been formulated' SB) in using the Eastern E.U. newby block to create havoc, is unknown. They will, however, press for a E.U. repositioning of traditional geostrategic diffidence with GWB's aggressively 'pro-active' interference in the oil-producing Arab world, and will eliminate the slightly pro-Arab, pro-Palestinian traditions of Italy diplomacy, in line with Merkel, Sarkozy, and others. I will try to find something on this when it emerges, to include it.Nishidani (talk) 09:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silvio Berlusconi's stance on the EU 

message: The parenthetic remark, '(who is a columnist of the left official newspaper l'Unita)' is POV because Travaglio is a classical right-leaning liberal who does indeed contribute to Unità, but also to La Repubblica and to Corriere della Sera. While true therefore, it gives the impression he is writing from a leftwing ideological perspective Nishidani (talk) 07:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right, so go and correct it.--Pokipsy76 (talk) 07:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Already had corrected it before noting down my edit here. Unfortunately there is much to correct, and I don't know if clearing every edit here beforehand would prove functional. If I find anything really controversial, I hope to register the problem here beforehand though.Nishidani (talk) 21:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Travaglio 

message: I tried to diminuish them and I succeeded, but something has gone wrong. the numbers starting beneath no. 18 belong to no. 33.
Can somebody please correct? I can't fix that 11347TCroa (talk) 16:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Austerlitz -- 88.72.20.61 (talk) 23:34, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: One of the first sentences is wrong: "Berlusconi has twice held office as prime minister of Italy, most recently from 2001 to 2006".
He was president for three times because in 2005 the governament fell but after that he led another one (the third one) from 2005 to 2006. Paolotacchi (talk) 17:47, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong sentence 

message: I quote what is currently writen in the article from the last sentece in the "private life" section:
"I cannot stay with a man who frequents minors".[5] It was reported that Veronica Lario was referring to Berlusconi's relationship with 18-year-old Noemi Letizia.[6][7]"
first, even if Veronica Lario said such thing (though, correct me if i'm wrong, she didn't refered to minors, she refered to other women in general since the Noemi controvercy came after her public annoucement), Berlusconi's intimate relationship with this girl, Noemi; has not been proved yet. Please, correct this and do not take as references articles from newspapers such as la Repubblica, known for making lies (an example is saying that Pope Benedict XVI was part of hitler's youth when young) and Il Corriere della Sera for being impartial, even more regarding that the european elections are near.
thank you 93.34.50.11 (talk) 09:52, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Il Messaggero has no link with the left; its property (Caltagirone family) has made his fortune with construction building, as Berlusconi did, and they have familiar links with the UDC centrist, demo-christian party, former Berlusconi ally. Anyway, that phrase was reported on any media in Italy. --Dans (talk) 20:39, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berlusconi's relationship with a minor 

message: "In the early 1990s, the two largest Italian political parties, the Christian Democrats (Democrazia Cristiana) and the Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Italiano) lost much of their electoral strength..."
Wasn't the Communist Party always larger than the Socialist Party? From what I read, the Communist Party has surpassed the Socialist Party in every general election to date...Aran|heru|nar 14:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Entering the field"... 

message: The references are a mess. I started a clean up to link them clearly. - Mafia Expert 14:22, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: This is by far the most ridiculous introduction to a wikipedia article i have ever seen...has nobody else commented on it? It is far, far too long.--CombatRock 21:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I came to the talk page to make exactly the same comment.  80% of it needs to be absorbed into the main body of the article. Unschool 00:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: I would like to let you know that Mr. Berlusconi actually is not Italian Prime MInister. I Typed "Silvio Berlusconi" on google.com and the first link I had was the wikipedia one, which says: "Hyperlinked encyclopedia article about the Prime Minister of Italy.". So the presentation is wrong and Prime Minister is not the right traslation of Italian "Presidente del Consiglio". 
Thank you 
Manbolo —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.18.66.26 (talk) 12:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can confirm the strange Google result, but as far as I can tell, it's not the fault of this article. Google's algorithms are a very close secret, and while they work amazingly well much of the time, there are bound to be bugs in them. --Trovatore 20:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

text: At least if they click through to the full article they can easily find the current Prime Minister via the information box. Google does have its limits... --Mike 01:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, no he's not. It is expected that he will be prime minister in the near future. Only after he is appointed by Napolitano and has won a vote of confidence in both houses should the article be updated to say he is prime minister. --Trovatore (talk) 16:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berlusconi is not Italian Prime Minister any more 

message: Can someone upload a better picture of Silvio Berlusconi? The current one is very low resolution and looks bad, especially since its the first thing you see when you load the page. thebandman 23:22, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree: the picture with the American flag must change. I've have no idea what it's implying, but it's distracting Lio 07:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just replaced the image with one I "made" myself, showing only Silvio Berlusconi, cropped out from this image. I hope no one had any objections, but it is no doubt lightyears better than the previous image used where one, if looking carefully, could spot a human beneath a giant american flag. --Ojan (talk) 21:35, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I still think it's a little distracting that Berlusconi is reaching across his body, holding that disembodied hand. (Paging Tom Lehrer.) Somewhere there's got to be a free picture of Silvio by himself, no? --Trovatore (talk) 21:43, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly there ought to be a lot better images, but the problem is, as we know that they need to be free. The old image was very bad with the american flag in the background. If you can find a better, I'd be the first to celebrate. Or why not remove the "disembodied" hand with GIMP as the image is in public domain? --Ojan (talk) 22:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I'm not too enthusiastic about using digitally manipulated photos on articles about living (or even just non-fictional) figures -- that sounds like a can of worms to me. Of course even cropping is technically "digital manipulation" I suppose, but I think we can all see the difference. --Trovatore (talk) 22:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I think this picture is just fine, great job! Lio (talk) 07:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: I am going to request semiprotection for this page.Massimamanno 01:23, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CRIME ACCUSATIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS ATTACKS NEED VERIFIABLE REFERENCES 

message: Berlusconi produced several films including the academy award winning film Mediterraneo. This should be included in the article. I plan to add a small section that should be expanded --Ted-m 04:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That strikes me as not extremely encyclopedic, borderline at best, unless he had some serious creative involvement with the film, which I can't rule out but kind of doubt. The producer (film) article says that major investors sometimes get an honorary "producer" credit. I'm guessing the real producers were the Cecchi Gori brothers. --Trovatore 04:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article ignores Berlusconi 's film career 

message: Come on, should this really be the second thing after the table of contents?  This isn't People magazine; let's stay away from the personal trivia (and I think that includes the pacemaker too). Birth, marriages, children; all that's OK, treated briefly, but details in this area are not particularly "encyclopedic", I think -- they're not of much interest to scholars, and will be forgotten ten years from now. A small mention of the flirting thing could conceivably go in "Controversies". The pacemaker I think I'd simply drop; it strikes me as recentism to mention it at all. --Trovatore 03:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Flirting" section 

message: I blinked at the legislative action and there are some unclaimed statements. Remembering how wikipedia is not original research, please post the sources or we'll have to delete some statements that are clearly not neutral.
This isn't the place for political activism, please cite the facts and restrain from personal comments and your original research unless you can support them. Sir Dante 14:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  About POV and citing sources 

message: Someone should add some information on his career as a singer . Translation from the Italian Wikipedia on this subject:he worked as a singer and entertainer on cruise ships when he was young and in 2004 he relesead an album of Neapolitan songs written with the help of a Neapolitan composer named Mariano Apicella.--Raggiante 19:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Singer 

message: Is it not important to also say that as much as he is loathed a large percentage of the Italian population strongly support him?
Yes, but you should notice that he controls information. The nazist party was strongly supported, too.
*** Logical fallacy above,  as an Italian citizen, I can say he has strong support from the academic community who to say the least are know for critical thinking.--Caligvla 08:14, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personality 

message: The guy that eliminated the trials from the articles made an unacceptable breach of Wikipedia Policy 
Content forking
A POV fork is an attempt to evade NPOV guidelines by creating a new article about a certain subject that is already treated in an article, often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts. This is generally considered unacceptable. 
The generally accepted policy is that all facts and majority Points of View on a certain subject are treated in one article.
:Splitting off a subtopic is not a POV fork. A POV fork is when you write a competing article on the same topic. It wasn't done perfectly in this instance; a fair summary of the "trials" article should have been left in this article, not just a pointer, but that can easily be rectified. --Trovatore 21:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was me who moved away the list of trials, and I don't like Berlusconi. --Army1987 18:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV FORK on the Trials ! 

message: Why the so many trials, investigations and crimes are kind of "understated" ?
The overall tone is overtly adulatory throughout the whole article.
Is there some reason for this ?
I'll go with biased, but adulatory? Why does his ownership of media sources and conflict get 1/4 of the introductory paragraphs? Is this really the best summary of a person? Obviously someone wants to drown him scandal. -cb 1/27/08  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.238.40 (talk) 19:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is biased 

message: The guy is a convicted criminal and still has many trials
running both in italy and abroad.. why they are quoted only as
a link ... kind of concealing them ?
:It was me who moved the list to a separate article. I did that because the article was very long, and the full list was boring for somebody just looking for a bio of him. (Articles should be kept shorter than 32 KB, see WP:SIZE.) However, I agree that the fact that he has committed so many crimes is important, so a brief summary could be added to the main article and would be very useful. --Army1987 22:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You can sign with four tildes ( ~ ), or with the button "Your signature with timestamp" at the top of the edit box. --Army1987 12:20, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the trials are only quoted as a link ? 

message: In my humble opinion it seems a bit too "pink" and easy in the way 
it depicts berlusconi and it is NON UP-TO_DATE
I would like to ask at the very least to update the 
picture .. mr.berlusconi is 70 y.o that picture has been 
taken some 20 years ago, there should be a real picture of berlusconi
in place.
:That photo is not too old. (He looks like that in TV, too.) The fact is that that man looks much younger than he is because he has his face lifted more often than his hair cut... --Army1987 22:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This Article is Unbalanced 

message: By long experience I know it's not the worth while trying to make this article neutral: there is a majority of so-called contributors (mostly left-winged italians) who are physiologically unable to distinguish their political views (=POV) from neutrality (=NPOV) and wikipedia from their own party political broadcast. If this is "democracy", well, wikipedia is democratic, but I do believe that wikipedia should be at first an "encyclopedia". Now, IMHO, for politically-sensible articles, it isn't --  @ hi 12:37, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally agree. Checco 17:03, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article will be neutral in year 2100 (maybe) 

message: There is a typograpgical,possbily even a data error that needs to be addressed. 
According to Forbes magazine, Berlusconi is Italy's richest person, an allegedly self-made man (see section) with personal assets worth $120,000 (USD) in 2005, making him the 11th richest person in italy [1].
I deleted the "contributions" under this paragraph because it was just a load of reciprocal insults. Sirio.a (talk) 15:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  An error 

message: ... and therefore we shouldn't be here fighting each other to impose our personal views. There are many great pages for political discussions but wiki isn't one of them. The neutrality of this page is questionable at best. 
I'll take as an example the "personality" section has NO scientific background or any factual statement, and it doesn't even give facts. First, his connection with Mafia and Craxi doesn't belong to that section, secondly i hardly see any connection between wearing a bandana and the personality of a man, third when he compares himself to famous historical figures he is CLEARLY joking.
Apart from neutrality, the article is a big mess. Facts, opinions and personal statements are freely blended in sections whose title differs from the content of the section itself (personality was only an example). 
I hope some wikipedians more skilled and more resourceful than me will try to fix this page, at its current state it is maybe the worst page of a living politician.
Sir_Dante
:Your points here (for the record, please sign your name in the future with four tildes) are valid, but they could themselves be taken to be POV. For example, 'scientific background' in the personality section? What would you have us do, offer his psychotherapists' notes on the man's character? Personality in general is a matter of interpretation and extrapolation; the most we can do is attempt to offer our views.
:Secondly, though you suggest he is joking about his comparisons to many famous historical figures, a great many Italians (and people in general) do not agree that they are jokes, and do not seem to take them as such. Many people see them as tasteless grandiloquence — in the interests of full disclosure, I am one of them — and might wonder if that alone is enough to disqualify him from running the government of such a prominent nation on the world's stage.
:Neutrality at Wikipedia does not mean displaying no bias so much as it does being equally-biased, such that all manner of opinions are taken into account and synthesized in the article. This is so a coherent but nuanced picture of the figure is acheived. It is bias to say, "Berlusconi is a criminal"; however, it is not bias to reference someone who holds that opinion (for a famous example, The Economist).
:I think, personally, the article is quite neutral as it stands. Why? Because we've received complaints at about parity that it is not neutral from Berlusconi supporters and detractors. That both sides think the article is biased against their view suggests that some glimmers of unpleasant truth are being exposed. 
:My opinion and mine alone, obviously. Wally 22:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I would like to remind all contributors that this IS an encyclopedia. 

message: From reading the main article, I can not believe how one-sided the writing is. It is although Mr Berlusconi himself has written it.
I can only assume that pro Berlusconi supporters are behind this article and I hope that in the very near future that we can remove the warning on the front. Please can someone chance the article and make it more 'balanced' and realistic, rather than reading like a CV?
Hayday 10:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It does not appear to me to have been written by "supporters"; there's lots of information on criticisms of him, and on his legal troubles. Seems fairly neutral. It's true that you have to read through a lot of text before you get to the critical part; perhaps a sentence or two alluding to it could be added to the lead section, or earlier in the lead section. The lead section is a bit long (see WP:LEAD); ideally it should be shortened, and then if it contained references to the criticisms, they would be more prominent. --Trovatore 14:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed. Indeed, I think you'll find that most of the people involved here on this article are lukewarm to Berlusconi (at best). Don't let's confuse a thorough article with a positive one. Wally 19:08, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, add it, then. If it starts getting too long, condense it (say, give a count of violations of each type, rather than explaining each violation). --Trovatore 15:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality Issue 

message: Berlusconi has announced that he will resign on Tuesday, 2 May 2006  . We should maybe talk about how the article will change when that happens, given that Berlusconi will have resigned, but his successor will not yet have taken office. Will Berlusconi then be a caretaker prime minister, or will there no longer be a prime minister? --Trovatore 17:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't exactly know what you mean by caretaker, but I guess that the premiership will formally be vacant. --Army1987 19:34, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Caretaker sounds like an accurate characterization. Otherwise we can just call it an interregnum. Wally 21:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there's a question of fact here. Is the office vacant, or does he continue to exercise its functions until his successor takes over? For example, what if the President of the Italian Republic (currently Ciampi) takes some action that needs to be countersigned by the prime minister; would Berlusconi do it, or can it just not be done? --Trovatore 21:59, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He'll be in charge for current affairs only. --Lou Crazy 20:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, that's not really an answer. Will he be, formally speaking, prime minister, or not? Surely this is a yes-or-no question. --Trovatore 22:00, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The question is more basically Will there be an interim Prime Minister? Answer that and the Berlusconi question is not so obtuse. Wally 05:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, OK, that would be a start. Do you know the answer to that? Or how to find out? --Trovatore 05:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If one looks at a list of prime ministers along with the dates of previous elections, one sees that the 2001 election was held on May 13, and Amato remained prime minister until June 11.  The 1996 elections were held on April 21, and Dini remained PM until May 18.  The 1994 election was held on March 27, and Ciampi remained PM until May 11.  In none of these cases does there appear to have been a separate caretaker prime minister.  This suggests to me that the old prime minister generally remains as caretaker PM until the new government is formed. john k 07:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks, that's helpful. --Trovatore 15:53, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Ciampi ha invitato Berlusconi - si legge in una nota del Quirinale diffusa al termine del faccia a faccia - «a rimanere in carica per il disbrigo degli affari correnti».
So that seems to answer the question—we should continue to note that Berlusconi is pm (perhaps with an explanation of his limited role), and remove that notation only when Prodi actually takes office. --Trovatore 17:19, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then the current wording of that sentence is ok. --Army1987 13:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berlusconi's resignation 

message: I deleted some "contributions" under this paragraph because it was just a load of reciprocal insults. Sirio.a (talk) 15:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Army1987 19:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

text: This is irrelevant, yes?  Prodi is now to be commissioned as PM. Wally 18:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just go 

message: Trovatore, first of all, please don't delete all of a contribution just because you feel that one of the many sentences in it could be tendentious.
Anyway, were you asking for sources for all the facts in the edit you deleted or just for the suppposedly tendentious sentence?
Just to be safe, I'll substantiate everything
* Berlusconi asked for a german style "grand coalition": see article on Il Giornale, a newspaper owned by Berlusconi.
* Berlusconi said one can't govern against half the italian people: see article on Il Giornale, a newspaper owned by Berlusconi.
* Berlusconi won the 2001 elections: do you really need a source? ;-)
* Berlusconi got 42.5% of the Senate vote in 2001: the results are on the web site of the Ministero dell'Interno, but are mentioned in Silvio Berlusconi#Electoral Victory of 2001
* Berlusconi governed for five years: again, do you really need a source? ;-)
* 57.5% of Senate electors had voted against him: it is the result of 100% - 42.5% (does elementary maths count as original research?)
:: Unless there are abstains. --Gerrit
:: Unless it is a "yes/no" vote, they cannot have voted "against" him, but for someone else. The phrasing implies a 57.5% majority of a united opposition. User:Wee_Jimmy
CUTEDH 18:05, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Leave the whole thing out, and it won't be tendentious. As it is, you're violating WP:NOR, by giving an original synthesis of the facts. Now lots of times you get away with that, but I think this is precisely the sort of situation that's aimed at. --Trovatore 03:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NOR#Example_of_a_new_synthesis_of_published_material_serving_to_advance_a_position is very clear. It happens when fact A is from a reliable source, fact B is from another reliable source, and someone writes: "A and B, therefore C". In this case, there is no C. Hence, WP:NOR doesn't apply here. --Lou Crazy 03:48, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The "C" is clearly implied. You can't hide behind the fact that you're not openly stating it. Now, if you could find a commentator who's pointed out that incongruity, you can quote him or her. But a coy "it should be noted" is not consistent with an intellectually honest denial that you're putting forth a thesis. --Trovatore 03:54, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If we were to remove from Wikipedia all facts which "clearly imply" something else, there would be nothing left. That's why WP:NOR#Example_of_a_new_synthesis_of_published_material_serving_to_advance_a_position is so clear in only condemning the stating of any conclusion "C". WP:NOR means Wikipedia shouldn't publish original research, it doesn't mean we should remove all means for a reader to do his original research on his own. --Lou Crazy 04:06, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've cut out the most tendentious part of the wording; it now states the facts rather than your conclusion about whether he had "problems" governing in that situation. It's still problematic with respect to WP:NOR, but less so. --Trovatore 04:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Facts cannot be removed from an article just because they allow for a conclusion to be drawn, but they should not be presented in a way that leads to a conclusion either.  If you have truely left just the facts and removed the conclusion than there is no WP:NOR problem at all. - Kuzain 19:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the way Trovatore reformulated the concept, it is much more succint, I just nit picked on it a bit in my latest edit. --Lou Crazy 02:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grand coalition, governing "against the will" of the people, percentages 

message: the site http://www.silvioconnoi.splinder.com/ is not a real site of Silvio's fans but only a (extremely well done) joke. On the 18/04/06 the site authors revealed the joke, therefore i think that it should be removed. ALoopingIcon 20:00, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silvioconnoi web site removal 

message: I've archived this discussion, as clearly nobody was paying attention to that "don't feed the troll" warning.  A hint: Dzoni is a troll.  Don't respond to him and he'll go away. john k 04:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If only the British National Party could be dealt with so easily... ;) Wally 20:10, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archived 

message: Berlusconi accepted his defeat by serenading a custom made song at a hotel in Trieste. Or did he? Many news agencies believed so, but some otherwise.
Pro:
ABC News (Australia) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200604/s1621740.htm)
Con:
The Guardian (UK) (http://www.guardian.co.uk/italy/story/0,,1759827,00.html)
I think currently only Mr. Berlusconi knows.
Talamus 00:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Singing Prime Minister 

message: Looking Portugesa Berlusconi's version of Google had the impression their front pages to find just the negative of Berlusconi. The first suggestion that appears is "Berlusconi Ruby. " The first notizia international scandals seem to me to banality: Berlusconi continues to do private parties after the scandal, Ruby says she received many gifts from Berlusconi, he lied about his age but never had sex with him.
On 06.11.2011 I visited dozens of versions of the encyclopedia Vikipédia Berlusconi in various languages and dialects. The most positive (or less negative) on Berlusconi seemed to be French. The most negative it seemed the Portuguese. Not only in Vikipedia but also in infrmation and public opinion. Never have I found a portuguise with positiv opinion about Berlusconi. The most negative opinion about Berlusconi: "Macho Latin that sucks. Come on stuffed with young people. "
If is true that Berlusconi don’t make sex with Ruby will be the bigest mistake of the web-information? Suks of Berlusconi or giustice and information? 
In various versions of Vikipedia I found a note to consider a policy of "not neutral ", "of course ipertrofia asppectos controversial treated in a journalistic style not suitable for an encyclopedia. "... « The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (February 2011)”.
More in portuguese: http://onu-w-gov.blogspot.com/search?q=Berlusconi, Mensagens mais recentes.  Mensagens antigas. Silvio Berlusconi, inteligência, populismo, verdade parcial, jornalismo, Vikipedia, Web-informação-online, opinião pública, preconceitos, moralidade ou ipocrisia?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.81.225.100 (talk) 19:04, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silvio Berlusconi, intelligence, stupidity, populism, partial truth, journalism, Web information online, public opinion, morality or ipocritsia? 

message: We read at the top that This article [...] has now been updated to try to solve those debates. If you feel that the article is biased or inaccurate, please add a section with specific problems to the end of this page where it can be discussed and a better form can be found.
There is an article Trials involving Silvio Berlusconi -- and rightly so, I believe. Yet the section here on "Legal problems" is longer than about "Business career", let alone "Political career". This strikes me as ridiculous. The material here should be added to that in Trials involving Silvio Berlusconi where appropriate, hived off into other Berlusconi articles where appropriated, and turned into a shorter summary here. -- Hoary (talk) 14:01, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: After declaring I'm politically left-wing and against Berlusconi, the section on "Legal problems" seems reasonably long and has a good summary, followed by some representative cases, while the real problem is the section on Controversies. --Blaisorblade (talk) 14:01, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal problems 

message: We read at the top that This article [...] has now been updated to try to solve those debates. If you feel that the article is biased or inaccurate, please add a section with specific problems to the end of this page where it can be discussed and a better form can be found.
There is now more in the article about "Prostitution scandal and divorce" than about "Business career", let alone "Political career". For a start, the title is sensationalist, in that it seems to assume prostitution, whereas prostitution is instead merely a matter of allegations. But more importantly it's hugely, ridiculously long.
There's an article, Ruby-gate, about one part of this. There should be a more general article (probably titled something other than "Berlusconi and babes" -- to which this material should be hived off; it can then be replaced here by a much shorter summary. -- Hoary (talk) 14:01, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berlusconi and babes 

message: I'm a little surprised that his indictment isn't mentioned at all.  Given it made WP:ITN, it should be covered adequately here, and I would imagine it is sufficiently notable to make the lead.  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:55, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The "in the news" section of the Main Page mentioned this, but I had the same problem at that time:  Is it really correct, in English, to call it an indictment?  To me indictments are delivered by a grand jury, an institution that as far as I know does not exist in Italy.  (In the States, a grand jury indictment is often unnecessary in the case that a preliminary hearing is held instead, but I do not believe that the outcome of such a hearing is referred to as an indictment). --Trovatore (talk) 22:18, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know.  I was going by what the BBC said.  The Rambling Man (talk) 22:29, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In Greece indictments are delivered by a body of three judges. There is no Grand Jury. So, maybe this is also the case in Italy, and the term is correct.--Yannismarou (talk) 22:54, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The Italian article on Berlusconi says la procura [gli] ha contestato i reati di... or something like that.  The news article says e` stato messo sotto inchiesta penale.  There is no article it:inchiesta penale, so I don't know whether that's a legal term.  I have not succeeded in determining the formal Italian term for what the procura has done.  It seems that the English press is calling it an "indictment" so I suppose we have to go with that, but in my opinion it's a dodgy translation, at least by American English standards. --Trovatore (talk) 23:19, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are talking about the incoming trial of 6 april, about having paid an underage girl and about the abuse of office, see the "Ongoing Trials".--Svello89 (talk) 17:20, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indictment 

message: I have some sympathy with the original complaint in the section above. Berlusconi's notability is as media mogul and prime minister, not the other stuff. Irrelevantly, I have just now changed the status of the article, which now requires that proposed changes by the unregistered and newly registered are approved before they're adopted. That's because of a series of edits that are either silly or involve the addition of yet more unsourced allegations. Don't infer from this any approval of the article as it is now. -- Hoary (talk) 01:03, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  A degree of protection 

message: Shouldn't there be more serious coverage of these allegations, now that it looks like it's going to court?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.214.43.76 (talk) 06:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mahroug prostitution allegations 

message: The sentence introducing the lodge highlights anti-communism as the sole purpose of Propaganda 2. The main purpose of it was instead to seize power (Licio Gelli didn't have anything against communism in principle, as proven by his links with communist spies during WWII, when it was unclear who would have prevailed in Italy)
The article reads:
In 1981, a scandal arose after the police discovery of Licio Gelli's secret freemasonry lodge Propaganda 2 (P2), which aimed to change the Italian political system to a more authoritarian regime to oppose communism[citation needed].
I suggest to write something like:
[...] regime and oppose communism.
Or even to erase the last bit altogheter.
Astabada (talk) 21:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: what about and to oppose communism ?--Dans (talk) 00:00, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose of P2 

message: D'Addario also stated that XX1 knows that she was a paid escort  ... what does XX1 stand for? is it a typo or what?--Melaen (talk) 01:27, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. The subject was Berlusconi--Svello89 (talk) 20:56, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  XX1 

message: As Italian, I want to apologize for the US comedian Robian Williams, who said that: <<Obama is a TAN Kennedy.>>... 
Don't you believe it? Watch it: http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=oEFR-eYaot0  
Silvio Berlusconi: a nice wild bunch of people all in just ONE PERSON!!!!!!!!
:As a wikipedian, i remind you that you MUST sign and date every participation you make.
As Italian, i hope you'll quit to come on the EN Wiki to post meaningless contributions like this one.
As a smart person, i invite you to consider the difference between a joke made by a comedian in a humorous TV show and a similar joke made by an important political exponent in an international summit. Willyminor (talk) 00:40, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not only Berlusconi... Robin Williams: Obama is a tan Kennedy 

message: Having noticed this I can't think of a way to fix it right away (merge or rename?) So could someone please pay attention? But, boy, the article in general is quite a read! --Garik 11 (talk) 22:37, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two separate sections bear the same title: Conflict of interest 

message: NOTE: English is not my native language and I never studied "legal" English, so I apologize for bad forms and misused words.
When the law on False Accounting changed in 2002 I found an italian article, written by attorneys on their professional blogs, that described the changes and how they fit with the rest of the civilized world. Unfortunately, I cannot find that article anymore. If you look for "falso in bilancio" you'll find lots of biased articles, in the sense that everyone tries to discards the new law as the "usual" asburd law written to legalize B.'s crimes. Most of them just repeat the same content, with little elaboration, so I don't have much material to bring here ATM.
Anyway, the article used to say the law fit the EU framework, in particular it was pretty similar to Spain's.
The key points of the new laws are:
1) False accounting is penally persecuted only if someone is damaged by it and issues a complaint
2) If (1) doesn't hold, it is persecuted according to civil law if the miscounted amount accounts for more than a certain percentage over the total. The percentage should be less than 5% and the punishment amounts to a fee proportional to the miscounted amount.
Before 2002, the persecution was always penal, there were no exceptions. If you were found guilty of false accounting you ended up in jail. period.
This is also reported on Corriere-Della-Sera article linked below, a newspaper known for being the neutral one by excellence.
Links (in italian):http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Cronache/2005/09_Settembre/26/alliberian.shtml
http://www.rolliblog.net/archives/2004/01/03/breve_storia_delluso_improprio_del_reato_di_falso_in_bilancio.htmlhttp://oggi.ilcannocchiale.it/?id_blogdoc=927896
I don't claim these sources to be unbiased or exhaustive. IMO we should get a neutral reference where the new law is discussed without jumping on the unlikely conclusion that is crazy and written only to help B. or criminals.
Finally, the so-called delaying strategy. Sorry but this one is totally incomprehensible. For one, the law system in italy is known to be extremely slow (http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Business/?id=3.1.840834245)
leading lots of trials to be cancelled due to statute of limitation, it's not a Berlusconi's thing. Secondly, in civil countries like Italy and USA the defence is expected to do anything legal to protect its client. If this leads to a longer trial, so be it. In particular, during some of Berlusconi's trials there were some irregularities on part of the prosecutors that cause the process to start from scratch. Is defence's fault to have addressed those irregularities, moving the trials' conclusion further in time?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.47.220.98 (talk) 10:16, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes on False Accounting and Delying tactics 

message: Check this:  before trying to sneak in edits with deceiving subjects, like you just did here: . Thank you. Was it your beloved Silvio who taught you to just sweep things under the rug? -- Femmina (talk) 22:59, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Usually i don't answer to trolls, but since you honoured me creating a discussion just to accuse me, I'll make an exception. The fact is that there was not an allegation for Berlusconi for traffic of drug. The italian article simply says that during a criminal investigation his phones were put under control and that after that the investigation was closed and archived. An allegation was never formalized and so no criminal allegation for traffic of drug. Good day to you.--Svello89 (talk) 23:39, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you provide a source for your statement that "An allegation was never formalized"? It's undisputed that they put a tap on his phone line, so it's reasonable to think that they alleged something. Also, could you stop calling people names and reverting stuff before discussing? -- Femmina (talk) 00:07, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Usually is required to provide a source when you make a edit that could put wikimedia in legal trouble (like saying that a living person was charged of traffic of drug), not the contrary. I'm sorry I've called you a troll, but you insinuated i made a sneak attempt to change the facts, suggesting "was it your beloved Silvio who taught you to just sweep things under the rug?", when i simply did what the subject says: finishing the rollback done by several users after 51 changes in a day, mostly vandalic. I saw these many vandalisms in a day and I thought that particolary one slipped the attention. But even if it was not from a vandal, you know that for that kind of edit is necessary a source or at least a subject for the change--Svello89 (talk) 00:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I seem to remember that a proper allegation was made, but it didn't lead to a trial. I don't feel like hunting for newspapers from that time and I don't own Travaglio's book that's given as source on it.wiki, so I won't re-add about the drug trafficking allegations for now. I left the subject of my last edit blank by accident. It was supposed to be "revert to last version by Fastily". -- Femmina (talk) 01:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dear Svello89, 

message: This page seems markedly biased against Silvio Berlusconi and lacks the detached and impartial approach that a wikipedia page should have. We must remember that the content is public and we are talking about a country's Prime Minister, thefore, whathever our personal political ideas and our simpathies are, we have to act accordingly. Several controversies exist on Mr. Berlusconi professional, political and personal life, and this is an additional reason why the article should be even more impartial.
I would like to invite the author to revise the article and, in particular, the attitude shown, that seems rather sectarian.
If she or he wishes, I am available to collaborate.
To conclude I would like to let the readers know, in case of any doubt, that I am not, I have never been nor I will probably ever be, a supporter or Mr. Berlusconi. However, I admit that as an Italian, I feel offendend by part of the content hereby published.
--Nebu87 (talk) 22:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm italian too and what offends me most is Mr. Berlusconi's public behaviour, not this rather well written article. -- Femmina (talk) 08:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Alleging unfair attitudes doesn't help anybody understand the point of your objection. Where the article "clearly lacks it"? -- Femmina (talk) 11:13, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Mr. Tony Blair doesn't act like a jackass on a regular basis. Mr. Berlusconi does. As a result, this article has a large section about his "Jokes, gestures and blunders". That doesn't seem unfair to me. And the same reasoning applies to the other controversies. -- Femmina (talk) 12:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: To a structured review, your answer is "The subject is a jackass, so the article is well written". Femmina: if's you don't have anything to say, stay silent.--Svello89 (talk) 19:39, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry. I didn't realize I was arguing with the owners of the internets. -- Femmina (talk) 01:42, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Stop blowing hot air, Femmina. Send halo fleet.
98.230.60.95 (talk) 19:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

text: Femmina isn't blowing hot air. What she puts forward is spot on and correct. That Nebu87 is offended by the article which correctly emphasizes the misbehaviour of the subject is not to blame on the editors.Otto (talk) 19:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. BTW there's a lot of interesting material on Berlusconi in Italian, English and other languages here, although I'm sure Nebu87 is going to find "serious equity issues" here too: http://www.giannivattimo.it/menu/libro_berl.html - Rez. 8:44, 2 Aug 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serious equity issues 

message: Please consider adding the recent "immigrants are not welcome but beautiful girls can stay" after the immigration control treaty with albania, in the jokes/controersy section. 220.225.87.66 (talk) 23:03, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beautiful girls can stay 

message: you have forgotten the failed assassination plot against Silvio Berlusconi in Porto Rotondo (Sardinia), organised by a Sardinian Indipendent movement called OIR (organizzazione indipendentista rivoluzionaria) and the Nuclei Proletari per il Comunismo, in the August 2004
http://www.repubblica.it/2006/07/sezioni/cronaca/sardegna-indipendentisti/sardegna-indipendentisti/sardegna-indipendentisti.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.12.216.226 (talk) 16:29, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Failed terroristic attempt against Berlusconi and Tony Blair  in Sardinia 

message: Neither the format nor the title of Silvio Berlusconi - Policies is acceptable as a Wikipedia spinoff article. It needs to be either substantially reformatted and renamed, or merged back into this article. Bearcat (talk) 04:52, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, and the same goes for Silvio Berlusconi Political Career. They should be either merged back or reformatted to look more like Presidential transition of Barack Obama, Foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration, and similar spinoff articles (i.e. a proper lead section, title, categories, and so on). Mushroom (Talk) 05:42, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Rename to Foreign policy of Berlusconi administration sulmues (talk) --Sulmues 17:02, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Rename like sulmues says. It might need work but this article as it is is already too long. No point making it any longer by re-merging the spinoff articles. Better to just improve the quality of the spinoffs and rename them while you're at it. Munci (talk) 19:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Rename to Policies of the Berlusconi governments and Political career of Silvio Berlusconi, then. Mushroom (Talk) 20:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge tag 

message: I was considering renaming the section 'Assassination attempt', but I guess it was just an assualt situation. GoodDay (talk) 17:55, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it was not an assassination attempt. The guy assaulted him, and used a heavy object, but he wasn't charged with anything but assault. It would be incorrect to label it an assassination attempt.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: When did Wikipedia turn into a Forum? The talkpage must be used to discuss how to increment or change the article--Svello89 (talk) 14:52, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Appears to me that that's exactly what the two editors were doing — if it had verifiably been an assassination attempt, then it would have made sense to say so in the article, but as there's no evidence that it was, there's no need to change the article.  Discussing that is perfectly within talk-page boundaries.  If the discussion were to devolve into a long debate about whether there was an assassination attempt, uncoupled from considerations of how the article should appear, then you would be correct to point out that such debate is out of place here. --Trovatore (talk) 03:51, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This discussion has been cleaned. The link shows how it was.--Svello89 (talk) 12:06, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attack in Milan 

message: This is indeed remarkable. 92.224.134.229 19:30, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  33 times is the keyword "[[mafia]]" mentioned in the Berlusconi wikipedia-artikel 

message: Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MizaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 60 days and keep at least four threads.--Oneiros (talk) 18:37, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Automate archiving? 

message: I have fixed the external sources here, as I understand that that was the intention.  Note that "www.larepubblica.it" is a site apparently completely unrelated to La Repubblica. Please don't link to that. -- Ekjon Lok (talk) 04:09, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  corrected source 

message: I don't know how many jokes and blunders is appropriate but I do know it is useful.  If there are too many, eventually a separate article might be created.  However, some may try to AFD that. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:28, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be a waste of time as the article would most likely be deleted or merged. I'd just add a section to this article.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  jokes and blunders section useful 

message: I found this sentence in the section about allegations of prostitution and his divorce:
"Though, more severe is the undeclared archaeological detection of a Phoenician necropolis under the Berlusconi estate near it:Porto Rotondo (Costa Smeralda), which was not recorded to the Government officials in Olbia:"Sotto qua abbiamo scoperto 30 tombe fenice ... del 300 avanti cristo" (English: Under here we have found 30 phoenician tombs ... from 300 BC).[163]"
This has absolutely nothing to do with his divorce OR allegations of prostitution.  I'm removing it. Mmagdalene722 (talk) 18:46, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phoenician necropolis? 

message: The following sentence was deleted without any valuable reason: "He is unanimously recognized as the best politician of the world of every time". User:PravoSlav.
:WTF?! --M4gnum0n (talk) 14:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So it should, its a POV sentence Ijanderson977 (talk) 15:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Berlusconi in fact IS the greatest living politician, he did not hesitate to rubbish the arrogant U.S. great leader Führer president. He is not frightened by the U.S., and therefore the Europeans love him. --84.141.3.164 (talk) 12:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: sorry i dont give you a source (i've read it in my local language) but it seems that Mr.Berlusconi doesn't know that Czechoslovakia doesnt exist for some 16 years (he was talking about the american rocket defence shield which was to be built in Czech Republic and Poland), doesn't know that the Kaliningrad Oblast belongs to Russian not Lithuanian and thought that the american shield was to be establish in... Georgia (the country which hit the headlines because the Osetia conflict). Please find the source of recent misfortunate statmentes - they are so funny ;D
: never heard of such stuff.--Dans (talk) 17:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another series of blunders... 

message: Isnt it better if the article were split up and give the controversies of Berlusconi a seperate page? The controversy section is extremely large compared to other sections in this article. Omegastar (talk) 19:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversies of Berlusconi 

message: New news story: "Silvio Berlusconi faces new sex party allegations", telegraph.co.uk 09 Sep 2009
"The leader of an opposition conservative Catholic party, Pierferdinando Casini, declared: 'The post-Berlusconi era has begun.'"
-- Someone who apparently doesn't shy from making controversial statements. :-) (Our article at Pierferdinando Casini)http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/6164221/Silvio-Berlusconi-faces-new-sex-party-allegations.html -- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 23:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The post-Berlusconi era? 

message: Is that template correct? Italy is always preceded by Japan and followed by France, but in 2001 Italy seemed to be preceded by itself (S.B. preceded by Giuliano Amato). Of course, no mention of the chair of G8 is reported inside Giuliano Amato Page (I would expect G.A followed by S.B ...)
Which of the two is wrong ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.80.247.251 (talk) 13:34, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chair of G8 template 

message: Information regarding past and pending trials involving Mr Berlusconi is currently spread over two pages, which is quite confusing. The section entitled "Legal problems" in the Silvio Berlusconi article contains two subsections ("False testimony regarding membership of the "Propaganda 2" (P2) masonic lodge" and "Jowellgate"/David Mills bribery case") that refer to specific trials. This information should be merged with Trials involving Silvio Berlusconi which is likely to become the main article for trials involving Berlusconi. I suggest we keep the "Legal problems" section in the main article for declarations and general issues such as controversy on laws passed by the Berlusconi cabinet or conflict with magistrates, and move all trail-specific information to the other article. --DarTar (talk) 22:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea.--Dans (talk) 16:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trials 

message: The image :File:Forza Italia.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The following images also have this problem:
*:      File:Logo ForzaItalia 2006.png
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --12:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image copyright problem with File:Forza Italia.png 

message: There are far too many destructive edits by new users.93.96.148.42 (talk) 04:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs to be PROTECTED 

message: Is this true?
*This is incorrect. The statutory limitation does not mean he is not guilty; at the very least it says nothing about guilt, and in fact it may indicate that he is guilty if the statute of limitations is applied after conceding benefits for previous good conduct (i.e. it would be the first verdict of guilt), because such benefits can be granted only after guilt is ascertained. See sentence #5069 of the Corte di Cassazione, May 21, 199693.96.148.42 (talk) 04:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: (restored the above paragraph deleted by 151.16.64.206. Please argue your point. Removing the opinion of other users with different views is not the best way to support your claim. --DarTar (talk) 19:02, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

text: This is untrue. In Italy defendants are considered innocent until found guilty, not the contrary. Whatever your opinion may be, this is the law. --Galaxia92 may the force be with you 18:22, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statute of limitations - guilty or not guilty? 

message: Not guilty.
The fact is simple. That definition (not guilty) is not used in the Italian legal system, which has strong fascist roots: in the Italian judicial system it is almost you are guilty until innocent, not innocent until guilty.
So, if you watch the problem on an Anglo-Saxon perspective you get an answer, if you watch it on an Italian point of view you obtain an other response.
:This is untrue. In Italy defendants are considered innocent until found guilty, not the contrary. Whatever your opinion may be, this is the law. --Galaxia92 may the force be with you 18:22, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Answer

message: This is important. Perjury is a serious criminal offence. The amnesty does not mean that he was innocent, rather that he was not sentenced.93.96.148.42 (talk) 04:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  His criminal conviction for perjury should be in the lead 

message: How many times has he been
1. Charged
2. Convicted
3. Amnestied
in criminal and civil proceedings?93.96.148.42 (talk) 04:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many times has he been taken to court? 

message: I reverted some edits which IMO were POV.
#It is a fact that laws promoted by Berlusconi's government influenced trials in which Berlusconi is involved. These laws should be cited among the facts which influenced the outcomes of the trials, not in another sentence. For the explanation of the laws, there's the "legislative actions" section, and this other page.
#Lodo Alfano is one of these laws, since it stops all trials involving the four highest offices of Italian government.
#Is the number of the prosecutors who have worked in the trials really relevant? It looks like a support to Berlusconi's claims of judicial persecution.
#"Politely"? Who says that?
--79.18.14.84 (talk) 23:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV edits 

message: Cited quotes by Berlusconi himself.
It cannot be POV because this is what Berlusconi said. I am shure there are many other pages on other politicians who claim the opposite, in the page of Silvio Berlusconi let Berlusconi speak for himself.
Putting the claim on the top of the section is POV, it seems that Wikipedia agrees with that. There's already his claim about the judicial persecution where Berlusconi speaks for himself. And since the other POV edits are still there, I'm reverting them again. --79.33.152.16 (talk) 10:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: The claim cannot be POV

message: Cavaliere Caccola, uno stronzo con sprezzatura. --tickle me 09:45, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just for kicks 

message: It is already clearly written that there are some of Berlusconi's lawyers who are MPs and MPs ARE legislators, so it is redundant.
About citing Antonio Di Pietro: I know that Berlusconi and Di Pietro are "two faces of the same coin", like Batman and The Joker because weren't Di Pietro Berlusconi never had the opportunity to enter politics, but if you cite Di Pietro you should cite some of Berlusconi's attorney too... More: Di Pietro was only a washer in a bigger clockwork, IMHO Di Pietro is NOT the most prominent political rival of Berlusconi who was a prosecutor too. Maybe Gerardo D'Ambrosio -with Francesco Saverio Borrelli and Luciano Violante- is a more prominent political rival of Berlusconi than Di Pietro and he is a former prosecutor too.
:#It cannot be redundant to add informations which are not obvous and not implicit in what is already "clearly written".
:#There is no one of the Berlusconi's lawyers and of Berlusconi's former prosecutor which has a political role which is remotely comparable with Di Pietro which is the leader of a politcal party and is one of the most popular people in italy (D'Ambrosio , Borrelli and Violante aren't leader of anything, never appear on the mainstream media and very few italian people know what is their activity or even know them)
:I am Italian and I am surely aware of who is or is not prominent here.--Pokipsy76 (talk) 08:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information deleted (2) 

message: Does anyone know who the phrase:
:Some of his former prosecutors are members of the parliamentary opposition
refers to?--Pokipsy76 (talk) 13:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious phrase 

message: Yeah: Gerardo D'ambrosio at first... Plus Antonio Di Pietro. 
But they are not the only ones...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.201.64.7 (talk) 13:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Answer 

message: I think all of this "apologizements" are ridiculous.
You hear SB talk and also hear the people laughing in the room. It was clear to ANYONE it was a joke.
You can dislike the joke, you can think it was not good, but you don’t  have any right to take it seriously as an “expressed opinion” with all the shitty theory of “racism” and whatever else.
That phrase only means no “race” exist, just an ephemeral colorization not to take seriously care of.
If you cannot understand it, that’s your problem. Not SB or Obahma problem.
Many people ask SB to excuse for that. But not Obahma himself. So why do he should? Are newspaper opinionists superior to Obahma itself?
As an Italian user I have to excuse the world for as many Italian ingnorants and Italian communist having “one way only understandment” of everything.
Connect your brain and shut up!
:1) Wikipedia is not a Forum
:2) No personal attack are allowed
:--Pokipsy76 (talk) 17:06, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Answer for another Italian user 

message: I don't think he is catholic. I'd delete that information as italian wiki had done.--93.149.140.61 (talk) 15:32, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catholic? 

message: I removed an irrelevant sentance added by an unregistered user with IP: User:122.108.71.31 which also resulted in a broken link. IÅI 09:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed bad edit 

message: Just to clarify why I reverted a recent edit: Although he may not be very widely known as Il Cavaliere in English-language media, he most certainly is in Italy , where he is almost universally referred to in the press by this nickname. And Il Cavaliere has been picked up by, for example, The Economist.  MistyMorn (talk) 21:13, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Support - very common in Italian media to refer to him as such, in fact I have read shorter articles on major news sites that only refer to him as such without giving his name.Connolly15 (talk) 16:05, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. And like much else here, the information appears only in the lede. If Cav makes it into the main body of the article, I think it would be appropriate to mention that the title was conferred by Giovanni Leone.  MistyMorn (talk) 20:17, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Il Cavaliere (dimezzato)'' 

message: My understanding is that, in line with the Italian Constitution, President Napolitano has formally requested Berlusconi and his ministers to remain in office to cover day-to-day responsibilities until such time as a new government can be formed and instated. Hope this helps--MistyMorn (talk) 16:05, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. They call this a caretaker government. In Belgium, for instance, a similar situation is going on for more than a year. Ivo von Rosenqvist (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 16:32, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

text: It's also spelt out in English in  this BBC article: Mr Napolitano's spokesman Donato Marra said the president had invited the outgoing government to "remain in power in order to finish current business. So, for the time being, Berlusconi remains PM.--MistyMorn (talk) 17:37, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

text: Yes, and we should finally be able to make this edit in the coming days. Until then...--MistyMorn (talk) 18:36, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

text: Thank you. Therequiembellishere (talk) 22:11, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You're welcome. I'm trying to confirm the exact moment a PM officially enters office.--MistyMorn (talk) 22:20, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Oddly enough, I don't see anything in this USAToday story that suggests he's still hanging around. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

text: @MistyMorn: In Italy that happens just after the ministers are sworn in.--78.12.168.206 (talk) 19:47, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vacant office? 

message: The news reports have said only that Mario Monti is expected to be confirmed as his successor. Please don't jump the gun on this.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 21:09, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: And this point still holds even though Monti has now been officially charged to form a government. Until Monti 1) succeeds in doing that and 2) is sworn in, he is not officially PM. Or at least that's my understanding. Monti is now "PM designate", as the BBC says, but in Italian politics figures asked to form a new government don't always succeed in doing so, in which case the President calls on someone else to try. That's the official constitutional procedure. In the current situation, it seems highly unlikely that Monti will not succeed in gaining parliamentary support to form a new government. But that's another question—we're not there yet.--MistyMorn (talk) 19:23, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Successor 

message: I think it's high time the controversies of Berlusconi get their own article. Therequiembellishere (talk) 04:40, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you consider the legal issues as controversies? Because that's the idea I had. I hadn't realized that his political career had recently been split too, and scrolling through the page, I can see that this would barely leave an article. However, as it stands, almost the entire article is legal and other controversies, and this needs to be amended somehow. I think if some more of the major content from his political career article was reflected here and do the same with the major legal/other controveries, we can still split the article and make the main one more concise (and less potentially libellous). Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:29, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well ... I was referring to the whole section 6 (Silvio_Berlusconi#Controversies). The legal issues already have their own main article (Trials_involving_Silvio_Berlusconi). Maybe we can split such section in more than an article. --Juanm (talk) 06:32, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

text: Done. —James (Talk • Contribs) • 8:53pm • 10:53, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

text: * Thanks for helping to clean up. The article's flow looks much better now. - Mailer Diablo 16:39, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article split 

message: Hi, i'm an Australian editor who is interested in reading overseas political articles from time to time, I thought i'd come here for all the latest on this issue. I note the article is very big and has detailed sub-articles, i've attempted to find this information but all I can find is one sentence at the end of the lead. Is there any other information available or is this it, so far? Timeshift (talk) 05:12, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: While that is sometimes a reasonable strategy, please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a news source; it's an encyclopedia.  It reacts faster than Brittanica, but if you want news, you might consider CNN, or if you read Italian, http://www.corriere.it or http://www.repubblica.it . --Trovatore (talk) 05:19, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Whilst wikipedia is not a news source, I do tend to appreciate wikipedia's fullness over media outlet shallowness with it's typically extensive documentation of political events like an impending Prime Ministerial resignation as a result of a failure to pass legislation/losing confidence. I just thought that the article would have had it by now. Also, I went to the Main Page first, thinking it might have been in "in the news". The best I can get is translated wikinews :\ Timeshift (talk) 05:24, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not about news. It's about comprehensive coverage of all the important events related to the fall of Berlusconi and the economic crisis which hit Italy during the last months of his premiership. I repeatedly visited this article the last month and the necessary information was not just there. I have already in the past expressed my concerns about the structure of the article which focuses on various controversies and legal problems but fails to present a comprehensive encyclopedic biography of Berlusconi.--Yannismarou (talk) 10:19, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  planned resignation and failure of "absolute majority" on financial bills 

message: I have updated the article to include the accusations contained within the US State Department's 2011 Trafficking in Persons report. fr33kman 15:04, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  US 2011 Trafficking in Persons report 

message: *Severgnini, Beppe. "The Secret to Berlusconi's Dolce Vita." The Wall Street Journal. September 24, 2011.
WhisperToMe (talk) 17:25, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: * Berlusconi ‘called Merkel an unfuckable lard-arse’ thefirstpost.co.uk. Are there any other sources on this?
216.172.135.21 (talk) 18:42, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berlusconi ‘called Merkel an unfuckable lard-arse’ 

message: current pic is 9 years old, i added a more recent one on commons from last month--27.123.136.92 (talk) 06:06, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent image 

message: Change "the his" to "his"
Original:
"Berlusconi has pledged to stay leader of Forza Italia throughout the his custodial sentence and public office ban." Hornesid37 (talk) 03:31, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 05:23, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

text: Done NiciVampireHeart 09:30, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2018