Talk:Tourism in Italy

message: The first line of the article initially read:
:With more than 79.6 million tourists a year (2015), Italy is the second highest tourist earner,[1] and second most visited country in the world, behind France (83.7 million (2014)), United States (74.8 million (2014)), Spain (65 million (2014)) and China (55.6 million (2014)).
Italy's tourism figures (international arrivals) usually hover in the 40s (of millions), so it stuck out to me that there was this drastic leap to almost 80 million in 2015.  The official statistic for 2014 was 48.6 million.  The source cited in the original claim was this UNWTO report from 2012.  Makes absolutely no sense.  Looking at the page's edit history, someone added this dubious statistic anonymously on November 19th, 2015, before that year had even concluded.
I revised the first sentence to read as follows:
:With 48.6 million tourists a year (2014), Italy is the fifth most visited country in internatioal tourism arrivals, behind France (83.7 million (2014)), the United States (74.8 million (2014)), Spain (65 million (2014)), and China (55.6 million (2014)).[1]
I changed the source to UNWTO's 2015 report.
When we have a reliable 2015 statistic, feel free to put it in there.  Please source it well.  I can tell you right now, it sure as hell won't be 79 million.
Thanks Skyduster (talk) 23:50, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable tourism statistics, fixed 

message: Compared to similar pages for Croatia and France, this article is a real letdown.  I've done some work replacing some poor pictures, for example the 'Lungomare di Livorno' image slot is now taken up by the Duomo of Florence.  To think that the caption for the Livorno picture mentioned that the Lungomare was built between 1800 and 1900, as if that were some sort of historic achievement for Italy.  
In my opinion, this is what needs to be done:
1.  Divide article by region.  Some of the smaller ones do not need their own but the fact that Venice, Verona, Naples all have one line is quite embarrassing.
2.  Better images.  There are far too many neoclassical representations of tourist locations.  With such a wealth of imagery, why settle for these?  Let's see some shots of Venice, Roman sunsets, Umbrian villages, etc.
3.  The tone is too informal and not helpful for someone who is planning a trip.  
==Weak article==This article is crap
This is a very weak article, and probably should be deleted! The only way to improve it would be to write an essay on the sources of tourism in Italy, and the tourism industry: hotels, the APT, the Pro Loco's, government incentives, the training of tourism professionals, the rôle of the Assessorati alla Cultura in the various comuni, the central government's rôle, etc. Since no one wants to do this, the article has, so far, been essentially dead.
The article is not improved by links to Wikipedia articles about the various regions, nor, even less so, to external sites: among the things Wikipedia is not (see that page), is a link directory; and if links were to be inserted, it should be to the 20 regions. Bill 16:08, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvements 

message: I’ve removed these, none of which seemed close to passing WP:EL for this article:
*Point of Interest in Italy in mapper.it
*Italian agritourism
*Birdwatching in Italy: A Birdwatcher's guide to Italy 
*Italy Lifestyle project
I would suggest that before re-introducing any of these, a case for their worthiness be made on this talk page.
Ian Spackman (talk) 08:29, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: Yes, I agree, the article is very poor.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.42.70 (talk) 08:46, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's not good 

message: I think this article could be of interest to readers at large.  If no one objects, I will begin revision.  I intend to divide Italy by region and address the tourist highlights in each, supported by links to the official regional tourism pages.  I am new to Wikipedia and open to advice and/or abuse.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by P-Twist (talk • contribs) 03:00, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Reviving the Article

message: There was a section on transport which I had added from Wikitravelsome time ago; nevertheless, I've removed it. Its tone was too informal (often direct, with 'you') and, in many ways, it didn't comply to Wikipedia's policies. It's tourist-like information, fit for a website such as Wikitravel, and catered to people interested in visiting the country; yet, in no way does that make it encyclopaedic. Unless anyone objects, I've taken it away.--&レア (talk) 21:30, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed part 

message: My edits were reverted with this rationale: getting a traffic fine is not encyclopedic. I don't see why tourists should not know that if they drive in Italy it may be costly. See:Stealth traffic tickets spoil European vacations  Ottawahitech (talk) 18:52, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversies section