Talk:Swiss people

message: Please see the deletion review discussion here. Badagnani 18:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I could not find anything related to this article on the page you link to ??? Schutz (talk) 00:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion review discussion

message: I was thinking about creating a photo-mosaic of famous Swiss to use in the infobox, but after I saw the amount of discussion for the French article I thought it'd be much wiser to talk about it first. I say we should choose 6-8 individual photos (rather than 27) to use in the top-right corner. Any suggestions?--Piccolo Modificatore Laborioso (talk) 16:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I cannot agree, it just doesn't look as neat and using a mosaic seems to be standard in this kind of articles.--Piccolo Modificatore Laborioso (talk) 20:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not opposed to a mosaic if it looks better than the present concatenation of images and if we can avoid the drama of Talk:French people/Vote...  Sandstein  22:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

text: I tried to line the portraits. We should find another image of Nestlé or another personality if we can't find any appropriate image for him, all the other portraits have regular edges so that one kinda looks out of place. For the considerations about infoboxes in general, I read the link you provided, and that user is right, but the fact that infoboxes continue to populate the Wiki servers in hundreds of thousands proves that we have yet to find a suitable replacement for them.--Piccolo Modificatore Laborioso (talk) 16:29, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You did well, but as you suggested a photo-mosaic would be better and I think there should be more people than just 9 (but less than the 27) and also at least one italian-speaking person. MadGeographer (talk) 17:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  photo selection 

message: you want to update the numbers with more recent data? Then please be my guest and do it (remember to update demographics of Switzerland while you're at it), but don't demolish the data we have without replacing it. --dab (𒁳) 17:37, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I assume you're talking about me and my recent edit, and I do only because it was the sole recent activity on the page, but from reading your message it's kind of hard to tell. If that's the case, I wasn't trying to update the census figures, in fact I added the "citation needed" template because I couldn't find any in the first place. Even if you did not understand my intentions I can't see how requesting sources can be considered "demolishing".--Piccolo Modificatore Laborioso (talk) 20:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Which were and remain unsourced, and thus worthless. We need citations for pretty much everything here, but when we are talking about detailed and questionable figures (177,000 Swiss in France? 48,000 in Italy?) we must either find sources, request them, or delete what still remains unsourced. For the "plastering": that's the only way I know to place inline citations requests. A banner at the top of the page would have been much too generic.--Piccolo Modificatore Laborioso (talk) 16:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

text: jesus christ you're flaming someone who left a message five months ago!!!--Soap9000 (talk) 23:11, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: jesus christ, I just noticed that this user continued edit-warring after I turned my attention elsewhere. jesus christ, are you just here to voice your exasperation at me or what? If you have an opinion on the matter let's hear a coherent rationale for whatever it is you are trying to do here. So you merged Swiss diaspora into this article. That isn't exactly a heroic feat, but it is certainly arguable based on article length, so, fine. Anything else? --dab (𒁳) 08:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: that's impossible, because that user hasn't edited a page since early april. that's three months ago. he couldn't have edit-warred with anyone. that's my coherent opinion on the matter. oh and  heroic feat? you've been here for five years and made over 100,000 edits. what could ever impress you?--Soap9000 (talk) 09:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: population figures

message: So "the Swiss" include "people of Swiss descent". 
Now, the Swiss Confederacy has existed for 700 years, but a Swiss passport has been in circulation for some 200 years (since 1815), so we can only meaningfully speak of "Swiss citizenship" since the 19th century. That amounts to about 8 generations. If the argument is that you are "Swiss" if you have one bearer of a Swiss passport among your 2^8=256 possible ancestors eight generations back this would mean that every person alive today might claim membership in up to several hundred ethnic groups. There would probably be several hundred million Swiss according to this definition. This makes any sort of population estimates completely futile. This holds for proper ethnic groups, and it certainly holds for the case of the Swiss, which, as the article points out in very clear terms, are a nationality, not an ethnic group. I also refer you to :de:Schweizer which naturally also states that
:Jeder Schweizer ist Staatsbürger der Schweizerischen Eidgenossenschaft. Er besitzt das Schweizer Bürgerrecht ... Ende Dezember 2007 lebten etwa 6,66 Mio. Menschen mit Schweizer Staatsangehörigkeit;
--dab (𒁳) 08:12, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Descent

message: This was an ill-advised move. It has not been shown that this is a recommended standard, and the support votes, such as they are, are a pure example of WP:OTHERCRAP.
Each article is named on a case-by-case basis. 
The only valid way to move this away from "Swiss (people)" within WP:NAME would be to show that "the Swiss people" is more common in English usage than "the Swiss". 
If you argue that "the Dutch" is also more commonly used than "the Dutch people", that's a point for moving the Dutch people article, not this one. --dab (𒁳) 15:39, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Which people group is more commonly referred to as "x people?" I always say the English, the Americans, etc. Yet they all use the same format.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.155.53 (talk) 00:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: move back

message: Is he really a representative Swiss?
Sorry I can't articulate more.
Bye  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.112.179.51 (talk) 17:24, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done a second version (:File:People from Switzerland 2.png) with Alfred Escher and Alberto Giacometti instead. Both are listed among the 100 most notable Swiss on the SonntagsZeitung article (Louis Agassiz and Paul Dirac weren't). I've also blurred the distractive background on the Ursula Andress picture. I hope you like it. mgeo talk 18:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paul Dirac 

message: There's 300.000 Swiss in Argentina, not 140.000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Argentine
is there a particular reason to why it is so?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariano Menéndez (talk • contribs) 22:39, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swiss Argentine 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Swiss people. 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/20081003000057/http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/R1b_large_RG.jpg to http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/R1b_large_RG.jpg
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080816111801/http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/I1b2_large_RG.jpg to http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/I1b2_large_RG.jpg
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080816111741/http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/I1c_large_RG.jpg to http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/I1c_large_RG.jpg
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 22:19, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Swiss people. 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/20150501154230/http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/I1b_large_RG.jpg to http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/I1b_large_RG.jpg
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20151023214417/http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/R1a_large_RG.jpg to http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/R1a_large_RG.jpg
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150501140712/http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/J2_large_RG.jpg to http://www.relativegenetics.com/genomics/images/haploMaps/originals/J2_large_RG.jpg
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080625012525/http://www.upf.edu/cexs/recerca/bioevo/2000BioEvo/BE2000-Simoni-mtDNA-AJHG.pdf to http://www.upf.edu/cexs/recerca/bioevo/2000BioEvo/BE2000-Simoni-mtDNA-AJHG.pdf
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 10:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The very fact that natives of Switzerland speak either a Germanic dialect or a Romance dialect - which ultimately leads to which language primarily represents which canton - it is patently obvious that the citizens do not identify as a single ethnic group. By all accounts, it would be absurd to do so in the circumstances because what exists in Switzerland is no different to any multi-lingual state. With language comes ethnicity, and no ethnicity has a tradition of unrelated languages being spoken by its members. Obviously it is possible that members of an ethnic group may have a margin of speakers of a different language but this is normally short-term while the internal minorities are in the process of assimilation. 
I draw attention to a similar dispute I am involved in at Poles and a conversation I have started at Talk:Germans. I would like to see an overall change in the "related people" categories on infoboxes. To explain, the usage is full of inconsistency and differs according to local editing community. The result? It tends to be non-reciprocal. I believe that ways to resolve this problem include: outright removal of the category; confinement to nations speaking related languages; or a re-branding of the title to "related or associated nations". One thing is for certain, what appears on one article should certainly be mirrored in the matching article. --OJ (talk) 11:40, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related people? 

message: There is a line in the naturalization section that states facilitated naturalization requires 5 years residence. This is only true for facilitated naturalization under article 29 of the BüG, which is only one type. Some articles for facilitated naturalization under the BüG require less time or no time at all. This line in the text should be removed or qualified.
2606:A000:7585:6400:C555:8038:6402:E25 (talk) 05:56, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Facilitated naturalization  

message: I added Lombard and Francoprovençal to the infobox, which was reverted by the user @Place Clichy with the following justification:
In infobox, linking to the national variants is sufficient. It is not necessary to add there other names for the same languages that are already introduced in text body and on the dedicated articles.
The issue here is that Lombard is not another name for Swiss Italian, nor is Franco-Provençal another name for Swiss French. I see no compelling reason why the traditional Romance vernaculars should be treated differently to the Germanic ones (note that we differentiate Swiss German, i.e. the term for Alemmanic dialects spoken in Switzerland, from Swiss Standard German, i.e. the Swiss national variant of the German language).
Since the reversion was based on the erroneous position that these words (Swiss Italian/Lombard and Swiss French/Franco-Provençal) are synonymous, I'll go ahead and re-add the terms to the infobox. I am open to leaving them out if I am presented with a better justification for their exclusion. saɪm duʃan Talk|Contribs 09:48, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox languages 

message: I don't think the principle of MOS:NOETHNICGALLERIES is properly applied in this edit. Because the illustrations were depictions of costumes and traditions, not specific individuals. It is absurd to suggest that a Wikipedia article, irrespective of kind, should not contain depictions of humans. Perhaps it should be reverted? Dhyana b (talk) 18:09, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improper deletion.