Talk:South Tyrol/Archive 2

message: Sorry for giving start to what could be a new dispute. What I find aberrant is the present system used for the names of the towns; while for the province a choice was made, prefering the German solution (all in all the best solution, since Germans are majoritarian), for the towns the weird "decision" was taken of not deciding, with Bolzano-Bozen, Brunick-Brunico, ecc. And while both Bolzano and Bozen are used, Bolzano-Bozen is simply absurd. I propose to use the language criterion to select only one name for all comuni; Bolzano-Bozen would be Bolzano, Brunick-Brunico would be Brunick.--Aldux 12:56, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Communes' names

message: H'm, I tried to find something about this guy here, and failed. Anyone has a link? --Tridentinus 14:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hannes Rohregger 

message: "The proportion of the Italian-speaking population thus grew significantly from 3% before World War I (census of 1910) to over 34% in 1961."  Where is a citation for this "fact"?  This entire page is almost written without any basis.
: Here's an official source, in Italian. Tridentinus 15:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent reference.  The only issue I have with this is that "Italian speakers", "German speakers" does not really show ethnic background.  Everyone in the US is an "English speaker" for the most part, but they are not English.  You can go to these towns and see the tombstones and see both German and Italian names going back centuries, not to just 1910.  Also, the origins of many of these people go back to Roman times.  Rules have come and gone, as have languages.  The people for the most part are of that region, be them in Italian Trento or Italian-German Bolzano/Bozen.  Hence you see blonde blue-eyes, dark hair, blue eyes, dark hair, brown eyes,  etc. and all different face features.  So anyway, where it says gruppi-etnici, it is not quite accurate.  This is also a "language census" from 1910, when the land was under the rule of German-speaking Austria.  It has to be taken with a grain of salt -- given also the era it was conducted.  There were definitely people chased out of the region for centuries, and some people moved in.  But it was small, on the order of thousands.  The majority of the families in the region have literally been there for centuries.  You can simply go to the churches and cemeteries and go through the birth/death records.  It is fascinating stuff.  You will find a lot of the names going all the way back to Roman origins, in a lot of them at least. take care. Taalo 05:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: This page should be moved from South Tyrol to the Province of Bolzano-Bozen.  There is no province in Italy with the name South Tyrol.  There is a REGION, whose name in German is Sudtirol. Taalo 03:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page should be moved 

message: I originally added the following to User talk:Taalo.
What should be considered is the separation of articles. Wikipedia should have articles on the (official) Italian Region of "Trentino-Alto Adige", its (official) subdivisions "Province of Trento" and "Province of Bolzano", and the (unofficial) geographic and historical region "South Tyrol". "South Tyrol" is certainly a term used frequently in English- just take a glance at Google Books. That is why I support the separation of the articles' information into "administrative" and "historical" articles. This historical territory of Tyrol would therefore be separated into the historical regions of North Tyrol, East Tyrol, and South Tyrol, and into the administrative regions/provinces Tyrol (state) and Trentino-Alto Adige, the latter divided into Trento and Bolzano. Similar case are Podlachia (historical) and Podlachian Voivodeship (administrative) or the various subdivisions of the historical regions Styria, Transylvania, Silesia, and Pomerania. Olessi 17:18, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was no move yet.  There is clearly going to be no consensus on a poll at this page.  What we need is for people to come to an agreement through discussion and consensus.  I've closed the actual "poll", but the discussion will remain open.  If a clear consensus ever forms, or there is clearly a supermajority, contact an administrator to actually perform the move. Another option, which I personally think is the only way that you will get a clear majority here, is to create a straw poll.  Just create a list of ideas for the title and/or whether to have multiple pages like a regional South Tyrol page and page for the Province of Bolzano first, without discussion, and then argue to pros and cons of each proposal. If one proposal clearly has the most support, the page can be moved there (or split if the proposal involves splitting.) —Mets501 (talk) 14:42, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some suggestions 

message: Bolzano was finally held in consensus. When are we going to address the same with the Province name? Rarelibra 18:17, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: PROVINCE NAME?

message: Is it possible to delete that embarrassing translation of Südtirol into Sudtirolo? 
I can assure you that no Sudtirolo exists in Italian, it makes neither any grammatical sense because Italian it is not an agglutinative language as is German, and at most you can talk about Tirolo del Sud. 
I'm aware some references for "Sudtirolo" do exists, but most of them are about a camping site. Sudtirolo is only (mis)used by some german-speaking south tyroleans when talkin with other italians, but just as a direct translation of their home province's name. It has no recognition in the rest of the country.
I really don't care about ethnic disputes or something, just to point out that no Italian can hear about "Sudtirolo" without having a good laugh. --Fertuno 18:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, according to a few sources, "Sudtirolo" is becoming more accepted in the area/region. Rarelibra 18:15, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it possible to know what source? On Google, Alto Adige gets 100 times more references than Sudtirolo. I think my fellow-countrymen should begin to be a bit tired of others telling them how to call their provinces. Calling it South Tyrol on the English Wikipedia is more than proper, but no way you can call it like this in Italian. It is Alto Adige, full stop. --Fertuno 19:05, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I find it very disturbing for you to say "Calling it South Tyrol on the English Wikipedia is more than proper". This name is an English translation of "Sudtirol" - the region is "Trentino-Alto Adige/Sudtirol", thus a proper English term would be "Trentino-Upper Adige/South Tyrol" and the province is "Bolzano" (or "Bozen", as the German translation), NOT "South Tyrol". Rarelibra 19:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Südtirol" is frequently translated into English as "South Tyrol".  "Alto Adige" is never translated into English as "Upper Adige."  This is a false equivalence. john k 20:17, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On the contrary, john k, "Alto" is "Upper" (or "high", depending on the context) in Italian. Therefore, if one is translating "Sudtirol" to "South Tyrol", one can also translate "Alto Adige" to "Upper Adige" (or "High Adige"). Not a false equivalence at all. Rarelibra 20:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree with Rarelibra.  The Adige river is what is used in English.  Also, Tyrol is an English version of Tirol/Tirolo.  Sud means South in German (and in Italian, for that matter).  Alto means high/upper in Italian.  Sudtirol has been translated to English as South Tyrol, more or less because it is easy to do (i.e. Sud -- South).  It is making nearly the same step to say Upper Adige really.  Both are actually informal translations.  Had the Nord-Adige (I know Fertuno, it is very bad Italian :), then it would of been easier to say North Adige.  Anyway, if you say South Tyrol, you have to say Upper Adige really to be consistent. Taalo 20:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Er, no.  I know that "Alto Aidge" means "Upper Adige".  The point is that the region is never called "Upper Adige" in English.  It is called "Alto Adige," or it is called "South Tyrol."  By your logic, We should have to call Mainz "Mayence" in order to keep it consistent with calling München "Munich".  (Or, for an Italian example, we'd have to call Livorno "Leghorn" in order to justify calling Firenze "Florence").  One name is translated into the English equivalent, the other isn't.  That's the way it goes.  No false equivalences. john k 16:38, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Er, good morning.  My logic was that really neither Upper Adige or South Tyrol is correct.  It is also entirely debatable if South Tyrol is most often used in English.  I'm fine though with calling the area South Tyrol.  In my experience though, this place is usually just referred to by its provincial name Bolzano (i.e., the Province of Bolzano) in English.  What is for sure is calling things the Province of South Tyrol is flat-out wrong. take care. Taalo 17:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Understood.  My main point was that I really don't like false equivalence, and pretending that the commonly used in English "South Tyrol" is equivalent to the never used in English "Upper Adige" seemed ridiculous to me.  In terms of the actual specifics, I'd tend towards the view that the region should be at Trentino-Alto Adige, the province at Province of Bolzano, and the South Tyrol article should be about the broader region, rather than about any administrative unit. john k 17:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I don't disagree with anything you say.  It is like having an article on the Midwest and then one on the State of Ohio aka Ohio.  I wasn't trying to make a equivalence, per se, of Upper Adige and South Tyrol.  I was just making the point (and it is my opinion) that they are both fuzzy translations. Taalo 19:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: YES!!! This is exactly what we are trying to have as the naming conventions. Rarelibra 17:24, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: AFAIK "South Tyrol" and "Province of Bolzano" refer to close to 100% the same area. I don't think it would help much to have two separate articles, that would be like having both "Aosta Valley" and "Province of Aosta", or "District of Columbia" and "Washington, D.C.". Markussep 18:39, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it wouldn't be the same, actually. "District of Columbia" and "Washington, D.C." are separate - the federal district is coextensive with the city of Washington. Poor analogy. And the Aosta Valley may not necessarily include ALL of the Province of Aosta (I would have to reference a map). The best point was stating that "South Tyrol" is an area that may encompass some or all of the Province of Bolzano - and is historic with a greater Austrian majority - German speaking (not German majority, a difference). So the South Tyrol article would have historical reference to the food, wine, culture, music, influence, etc while the actual provincial article would have some of the same information, yet be for the province proper. I'm quite sure there are examples of this separation already somewhere on English wiki. Rarelibra 18:56, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Don't you agree that if the area of South Tyrol is the same as that of the province of Bolzano, we only need one article? Note that South Tyrol was never a separate entity before the First World War. Markussep 19:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Markussep - what I agree on is this - that if the area of South Tyrol and the Province of Bolzano are the same, that the name be changed to reflect the proper name of the province (or something to appease like the suggested "Bolzano-South Tyrol", etc.) in order to include the proper reference. If the emphasis must be on the "South Tyrol" name, then no, I think there should be two articles, then. But yes, it does seem redundant. So maybe you and I are on the same page? :) Rarelibra 19:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Let Lar find the best name for the article, but at least we agree that there's no need for two articles here (provided they're the same). Markussep 19:41, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this.  Trentino redirects to the Province of Trento.  As well South Tyrol, Südtirol, Sudtirolo, Tirolo del Sud, Upper Adige, Alto Adige, etc. can redirect to the Province of Bolzano.  Then just very clearly keep the tri-lingual names in the body of the article.  But yeah, let User:Lar have the fun. ;-) Taalo 19:44, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I should clarify.  I agree with you saying we can go with one page.  The rest is just my opinions. :-) Taalo 19:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Along these lines, we're not talking about what the Italians call Wroclaw - in English it is still Wroclaw. Szczecin is still Szczecin in English, Gdansk is Gdansk, Izmir is Izmir, and so on. We're trying to resolve the English equivalent of this province, whose proper name is "Bolzano" ("Bozen" is the German name, NOT the English translated name). The English translation is still "Bolzano". So the proper name of this province needs to be "Bolzano". There should be a sub-article (or separate article) about South Tyrol (the area). But this won't have anything to do with the proper name of the province (and province article). They may be somewhat interrelated. I think the best example I had was for District of Louisiana - which is now Arkansas. You don't see people trying to rename it as "District of Louisiana" for historic purposes. The proper name is "Arkansas" given by the US government (as is "Bolzano" given by the Italian government). So this information needs to be split into the two articles - one for the province, one for the area. Is that sufficient? Rarelibra 16:41, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The official name of the province is nor Bolzano neither South Tyrol. It is Provincia Autonoma di Bolzano-Alto Adige (in Italian) and Autonome Provinz Bozen-Südtirol (in German). So unless you want to call it United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland just South Tyrol is absolutely proper. --Fertuno 16:56, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, come on now.  It is simply the Provincia Autonoma di Bolzano.  You don't say Provincia di Firenze - Toscana, Provincia di Pisa - Toscana, Provincia di Siena - Toscana, Provincia di Trento - Trentino.  Just like in the US you don't say State of Ohio - Midwest, State of Indiana - Midwest.  You just say Ohio and Indiana, and they are in the Midwest. Taalo 19:32, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: The official name should be the Italian name, translated into English (thus, "Bolzano" or whatever form is decided upon), not the German translation. The United Kingdom official name is "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" which is shortened to "United Kingdom". If you wish to use the same analogy, the "Provincia Autonoma di Bolzano-Alto Adige" (Province of Bolzano-Alto Adige) would be shortened to "Province of Bolzano" or "Bolzano", NOT "South Tyrol". Your analogy is incorrect. Rarelibra 17:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: NO: The original names in South Tyrol are ALL german--Martin Se 14:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh my goodness, what absolute and utter rubbish.  If anything, names like Meran are from Latin (i.e., Rome), not German by any stretch of the imagination.  You have to remember that the Germans came into this region and Germanized it themselves -- long before the relatively tiny period of Fascism.  Don't revise history based on the past one to two hundred years.  Jump off the ethnic/nationalistic bandwagon; it does everyone a lot of good. :) my regards. Taalo 05:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, historically German-speaking in the last few centuries.  But the area below the Brenner pass has always been more Roman.  Certainly Trentino, which was part of the Tryol region, has always had Italian roots.  So, it is not so complicated, as you say, but it is also not quite that simple. :-)  I also have no problems with the various names.  The thing that makes this area around the Brenner pass so interesting is specifically that it is Italian plus Austrian.  Anyway, my only disagreement to what you say is that Trentino-South Tyrol is what is commonly used in English.  I have seen the far majority of references use Trentino-Alto Adige.  I think using South Tyrol to describe this area adjacent to the Province of Bolzano would make a lot of sense though. Like a page maybe South Tyrol (historical). Taalo 18:39, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Hey Tridentinus, why don't Soles (Val di Sol) and Nones (Val di Non) not have language rights like Ladin?  There is more speakers of Nones probably than Ladin.. hah.  It was interesting for me to realize that Ladin and Nones, Soles, etc. are all related.  I always just considered them dialects of Italian, where in fact they are dialects of Italy.  Anyway, I can fairly well understand both Italian and these dialects/languages, what have you.  Taalo 19:48, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, and with regard to Tirolesi.  I'll still argue that we are both.  By now the Tirolesi culture is one that is definitely an Austrian-Italian culture with roots in Ancient Rome. Taalo 19:49, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sudtirolo? Are we kidding? 

message: It was requested that this article be renamed but the procedure outlined at WP:RM#Steps for requesting a controversial page move did not appear to be followed, and consensus could not be determined. Please request a move again with proper procedure if there is still a desire for the page to be moved. Thank you for your time! -- tariqabjotu 10:40, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move Request

message: "Prime Minister Winston Churchill called the annexation of South Tyrol by Italy a huge mistake."
I removed this sentence from the article until someone provides a source.--Supparluca 09:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: good call. Sounds like POV pushing. Rarelibra 22:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, a big surprise that would be! Taalo 23:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation needed

message: First things first. I'm a total newbie at wiki. I just came across this article and noticed some things which need correction.
* Area: 7,400.43 km2
* Density: 65
* Population: 482,650 (2005)
more figures can be found here: http://www.provinz.bz.it/astat/publ/publ_getreso.asp?PRES_ID=69870 "South Tyrol
in figures - Autonomous Province of South Tyrol"
* Postal Code. 39100 is the code for Bolzano-Bozen only. the code for the area is 39*** (Merano-Meran 39012, Bressanone-Brixen 39042 ... check http://www.poste.it/online/cercacap/
* "The capital of the province is Bolzano." is not correct. The correct form is: "The capital of the province is Bolzano-Bozen." the ladin name for "Bolzano-Bozen" is "Bulsan" therefore you could argue that the trilingual form is: "The capital of the province is Bolzano-Bozen-Bulsan."
ciao —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.199.21.19 (talk) 18:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to correct the info if it is true. Gryffindor 21:10, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

text: The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was polls DO NOT work for things like this.  It is obvious where this is one is going. —METS501 (talk) 21:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corrections 

message: Add "# Support" or "# Oppose" on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.
====Survey - in support of the move====
#Support, indeed the official name of the province is Provincia Autonoma of Bolzano - Alto Adige/South Tyrol (English: Autonomous Province of Bolzano - Alto Adige/South Tyrol). If we want we can shorten it in Autonomous Province of Bolzano, but it is fairly wrong and partisan to use only South Tyrol, which is not the translation for Alto Adige, which means Upper Adige. Anyway this is not a problem of language but of internal coherence of Wikipedia: as all the articles about the provinces of Italy are named Province of XXXXX (see Province of Milan, Province of Rome, etc.), I can't understand why this article has to be named differently from the others. --Checco 12:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survey 

message: #Support, indeed the official name of the province is Provincia Autonoma of Bolzano - Alto Adige/South Tyrol (English: Autonomous Province of Bolzano - Alto Adige/South Tyrol). If we want we can shorten it in Autonomous Province of Bolzano, but it is fairly wrong and partisan to use only South Tyrol, which is not the translation for Alto Adige, which means Upper Adige. Anyway this is not a problem of language but of internal coherence of Wikipedia: as all the articles about the provinces of Italy are named Province of XXXXX (see Province of Milan, Province of Rome, etc.), I can't understand why this article has to be named differently from the others. --Checco 12:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey - in support of the move

message: # Oppose - In English, it's usually spoken of as South Tyrol, no one uses the name Autonomous Province of Bolzano. InfernoXV 11:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey - in opposition to the move