Talk:Italian irredentism

message: Dalmatia is not in the list of target regions, but the later disclaimer specifies it.
So did the party target Dalmatia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.58.3.237 (talk • contribs) 14:14, 27 October 2004
General tone- Irredentism
The general tone of the article is not very balanced. It treats the political aims of Irredentism as somehow illogical and childish.
It very conveniently neglects mentioning that Guglielmo Oberdan was executed, and so were Cesare Battisti, Nazario Sauro, Damiano Chiesa.
Not mentioning the main political figures of Irredentism is a major error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.190.72.16 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 27 September 2005
:This article was taken from 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, that is in an age in which Italy was allied to Germany and Austria; thus the bias, and thus the interest in 1877-1878 events.--Panairjdde 17:56, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've removed the most of the comment of Fromtline, that wrote an amount of Propaganda lies, about the irredentism in Dalmatia. I've verified he is one of the many fanatic nationalists, acting in wikipedia.--Giovanni Giove 06:46, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dalmatia 

message: Why the partial lock on this article? Epeeist smudge 13:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lock? 

message: Who's playing dumb here ?
Deleting the lines "Italy openly propagates" and substitutes it with "irredentism faded away"?
That's vandalism.
"Faded away", but with persistent claims towards neighbouring countries territories?
There's no excuse for that. Even if someone uses the excuse like "it was by some minor parties, like MSI", these is not the excuse. Official Italy didn't suppress such expansionist rhetorics, nor prosecuted it. To make things worse, did MSI later became one of governing parties in 1990's? Kubura (talk) 08:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faded away and vandalism 

message: There were few accords regarding that.
Peace accord with Italy (articles 19 and 20) (whose legal "strength" started on 15 Sep 1947) regulated opting possibilities (opt to stay or leave).
Also, Pravilnik o opciji osoba s područja pripojenog Federativnoj Narodnoj Republici Jugoslaviji po Ugovoru o miru s Italijom, Službeni list FNRJ br. 109/1947, regulated this. 
Second accord was signed in 1951.(Sl. list FNRJ br. 1/1951. i br. 12/1951). 
Leaving of Zone B of Free territory of Triest was regulated with Memorandum o suglasnosti (točka 8.), signed on 5. Oct 1954 (Sl. list-MUIDS br. 6/1954).
Third accord was signed in 1965,  Uredba o ratifikaciji sporazuma između Jugoslavije i Italije o regulisanju nerešenih slučajeva opcija za italijansko državljanstvo, Sl. list –MUIDS br. 8/1965).
Few legal possibilities, but lesser used for leaving for Italy, were one which was given option to give up on Yugoslav citizenship. Zakon o jugoslavenskom državljanstvu (Sl. list SFRJ br. 38/1964) and Agreement of Osimo from 10 Nov 1975 (his legal validity started on 11 March 1977) (Sl. list-MU br. 1/1977) . Kubura (talk) 10:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italo-optants 

message: would it not be better to name the article "Unredeemed Italy", or "Unclaimed Italy"? We do not use the Italian version of the name: Italian Unification, so surely the same principle shoula apply here. Personally I would opt for "Unclaimed" rather than "Unredeemed". Crystalclearchanges (talk) 12:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It suggests that some kind of Italy is in question, which is not correct, since debated territorries are not Italy. Actually "Italian irredentism" would be the most correct. Zenanarh (talk) 15:10, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I would be happy with Italian irredentism. But I think unredeemed italy or unclaimed italy would also suit it. What does everybody else think? We need an admin to help the move. Crystalclearchanges (talk) 19:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename 

message: as is going on in a long-term discussion that comes and goes on this page, some users are trying to push the idea that Maltese is purely arabic with only an insignificant input from Sicilian and Maltese. I was hoping that some people here, having studied this sort of thing, will be able to help get rid of the POV pushers, and show that Maltese is just as equally Italian (well... Sicilian/italian) as it is Arabic. Thank you 78.145.139.94 (talk) 19:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Maltese language]] 

message: I tried to use a more neutral language. Please, do not think that I like Fini, Menia, etc, but saying that "Dalmatia was stolen to Italy" is not expansionism, just persecution complex, "we should annex Dalmatia" would be expansionism. I add some facts, with their references, checking what was added in the past to the article. Clap (talk) 13:49, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral language 

message: I've attempted to streamline the article to bring it back to what it's supposed to be about (more or less)- Italian irredentism of the Risorgimento. Most of the material better suited to Greater Italy and fascist aspirations don't really belong here, other than some mention because they may be "rooted" in irredentism or they use "irredentism" as a pretense. In addition, I've tagged some sections I see  as WP:POV forks. They too need to be cleaned up and changed from what reads like a blog forum into something more encyclopedic. Dionix (talk) 20:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up 

message: I've deleted the chapter. Irredentism time is over in 1945. Nevertheless in Croatia there is a legend about a supposed Italian irredentism, still alive. Newspaper sometime print articles about this subject. Well, it's just a legend. To talk about an Italian past in Dalmatia is history (as Fini did), and not Irredentism. Please, let's try to remain logic and neutral.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.13.164.57 (talk) 16:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the intention of this editor's post. The post-1945 section, which has re-appeared since 78.13's edits, is given undue importance and is simply a series of isolated, petty events. I would suggest rewriting the section, weighed proportionately within the context of the article: one paragraph should suffice. Dionix (talk) 19:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irredentism today 

message: The map is perfectly suited for italia irredenta. It is well related to all the areas claimed by irredentism. It is a map that has nothing to do with fascism or antifascism but only with irredentistic areas of Italy, as was tought in official italian schoolbooks before and even after WWII. --Popovichi (talk) 02:10, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: User Popovichi, I LEFT the map. You can not revert several proper&correct&referenced edits under the pretest of a map, that was still in the article (though not at the beginning) and shouting  for vandalism.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.13.164.180 (talk) 06:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I had removed the map because the text was overbearing, repeated what is already in the article, and I thought the image was better suited to Greater Italy. The map repeats in that "main article" anyways. Nonetheless, I have no problem leaving it here, where it is, with the appropriate, short form text. Sorry if I sparked an unintentional edit war :) Dionix (talk) 16:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: to "Italian irredentism" 89.243.190.182 (talk) 17:00, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good moving. But what is "Italia irredenta"? Don't you think it needs an article? I mean, to tell what was the idea of "Italia irredenta" in different times.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.13.167.236 (talk) 20:23, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change 

message: No historicist today speak of It. irredentism: there is no irredentism today. Just few Croatian journalists do this claim.  I've tried to change the paragraph into a more neutral version, introducing SEVERAL new sources. Two users from Croatia reverted me, ignoring all the sources, under the pretest of a "poor grammatic". They did not discussed their revert at all.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.13.167.236 (talk) 23:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Reasons why your version of article is wrong:
*You are taking position:"The Habsburg Monarchy permanently made obstacles to the Italian interests..." ????? This is against wiki rules.
**I've not written such claim!!!
*350.000 Italians opted for Italy ? For that you need census data
**Not only I've not written this claim, but I've deleted it! .... but you restored it again!
*Your version of article is speaking about modern Italian irredentism, so why you write about that and then write on talk page that "there is no irredentism today". I agree with you that there is no modern Italian irredentism but only Italian pressure that Italian fishermen can take fish from Croatian sea, but in the end this is mistake of Croatian, and not Italian government.--Rjecina (talk) 23:37, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

text: I'd rather see it disppear- however, I'm not opposed to keeping the section on "Irredentism today". I feel it opens the floor to serious POV pushing from both sides, based on flimsy, unimportant political views and meaningless quotations. However, if we must keep it, shouldn't it be trimmed down to a paragraph or two? This section is currently longer than the "actual meat" of the article above it. Dionix (talk) 21:58, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've fixed the language and reduced the section somewhat. I still maintain that the first paragraph alone suffices. Dionix (talk) 22:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I entirely agree with Dionix. I removed this section as unsalvageable a while ago, but then it somehow returned. It is non-encyclopedic and just about impossible to understand. And will always just be an excuse for people to try to beat the other side over the head with more badly translated quotes. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 07:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irredentism today 

message: Two facts:
1. Alleanza Nazionale does not describe itself as neo-fascist, and it's not described as such by any Italian media. It's beyond doubt that it does not promote in any way totalitarianism.
2. Alleanza Nazionale did not exist in 1994 (it was formed in 1995).
I don't like them, but they are not neo-fascist, at least no more, and I have never heard any of their parlamentarians speaking of "occupied territories" after 1995. 87.9.235.99 (talk) 17:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fini was welcomed as a friend in Israel. Could Israelians welcome a fascist?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deguef (talk • contribs) 16:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alleanza Nazionale 

message: * In fact Italian irredentists supported claims for Trentino, Trieste, most of Istria and a part of Dalmatia, but not for most of South Tirol and parts of the Balkans. They were also against Italian expansionism in Africa (Libia, Tunisia, Horn of Africa) and in the East Mediterranean (see Alceo Riosa, Milano in guerra 1914-1918, Milano, Unicopli 1998).--Deguef (talk) 06:41, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italian Irredentism does not overlap with nationalism 

message: This article has been transformed from an account of Italian expansionism into yet another "ode to the poor exiles" on enWiki. "The Allies bombed the hell out of Zadar, but don't blame the good Allies, it must have been The Devil [i.e. Tito] that made them do it." This is just an example. Fake unprofessional "exile sources" moaning about how the poor fascistoid oppressors that lorded over the South Slavs of Dalmatia and Istria for centuries were "ethnically cleansed" by the brutish Slavic hordes. Either that, or they left to escape the Eastern Bloc, communism, and the Slavic state, which is an "unheard-of" phenomenon. What utter nonsense.
This article needs attention once more. Offensive POV conspiracy theories cannot be added into enWiki articles without a metric TON of sources. Save your ethnic hatred for itWiki, its a dump anyway with regard to neutrality in this. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 18:14, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another damn exile article 

message: A few things that irritate me:
Why is there no mention of the violent cultural ethnocide and Fascist Italianization that the Fascists systematically carried out during the inter-war period against non-Italians (most severely against Slovenes and Croats)?
And why is there no mention of Fascist crimes against humanity during World War II against Yugoslavs and Greeks? And of the crimes against humanity against Libyans (started already in 1928) and against Ethiopians (started already in 1935)?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.143.131.54 (talk) 13:11, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inter-war period, cultural ethnocide, crimes against humanity and World War II 

message: The paragraph "supposed irredentism today" seems an Original Research doing by cherry picking references taken out of their contexts. The title is very significant of this: "supposed" Italian irredentism today. The paragraph clearly states that Italy doesn't support irredentism and it deals with mere opinions of few people, a lot of which, as the resources demonstrates - and the paragraph says -, were object of mere mistranslation by croatian-slovene newspapers and politicians. So this articles isn't about irredentism but about fake scandals. So this paragraph is abput absolutely nothing. It should be deleted.AndreaFox  Knock here... 18:22, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Considerig no one opposed to my statement, I'm going to delete this section. Fell free to discuss it here if you disagree. AndreaFox  Knock here... 12:25, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: I think the confusion between Italianist ideology as a political movement and the modern concept of an 'Italian' people needs to be discussed in this article. This is important because the notion of Italian irredentism concerns the idea of 'the unredeemed lands of 'Italian' peoples. It is therefore important to discuss the issue of who exactly are the 'Italian' people. Historically this question is absolutely clear, prior to the creation of Italy by Garibaldi in the 1860's, there was no such thing as an 'Italian' people. In fact, the Italian peninsula happens to be one of the most ethnically and culturally diverse regions in Europe. It was only after the creation of the state of Italy in the 1860's that the notion of an 'Italian' people came into existance. Therefore, the term 'Italian' is in reality simply a reference to a persons nationality or chosen identity. Being 'Italian' is a choice, a persons ethnicity is not. Calling oneself an 'Italian' is akin to a person from the old Soviet Union calling themselves a 'Soviet' etc. Ironically, although many people from Italy have accepted the Italianist ideology and now self identify as 'Italian', many of the peoples of todays Italy also have not. This is clearly evident from the great number of ethnic groups within Italy today from Padania, Venetia and Sardinia in the north all the way down to Calabria and Sicily calling for autonomy or outright independence from the Italian state.
Considering this, as far as the notion of 'Italian irredentism' is concerned, one must therefore ask who exactly are these 'Italian' peoples they are talking about? Factually, this can only mean one of three things etc:
01. The descendants of settlers who originated from regions that now form part of the Italian state such as Venetian, Genoese etc.
02. Local indigenous peoples in the areas claimed such as Croatians and Slovenians who have choosen to adopt Italianist ideology and now identify as being 'Italian' irrespective of their real ethnic origins etc.
03. Local indigenous peoples in the areas claimed such as Croatians and Slovenians who were forced at gunpoint to adopt Italianist ideology and learn the Tuscan ('Italian') language during the Italian fascist occupation during WWII.
Whichever is the case, the fact is that there is no legitimate reasons for claiming the lands that Italian irredentists do. Therefore, it is important the article should clearly point out that 'Italian irredentism' is a racist and extreme nationalist ideology that has no basis in historical fact. The idea of a single 'racially pure' 'Italian' people stretching all the way back to Roman times who are now living both within and without the modern Italian state is a concept that should have died with Mussolini and his black shirted racial bigots in the 1940s.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.39.86.19 (talk) 00:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You have no idea what you're talking about. The idea of an Italian nation goes far back to the IX century and before. There were wars which were fought "for Italy and Italians" and you can find clues on Italian identity in books and legal papers. Try and read the latin "Peace of Venetia" (1177) or the sixth canto of the Inferno, Purgatorio, Paradiso (1300-1321) by Dante. You can read prose/poetry about Italian self-identity in Boccaccio and Petrarca, to name the most famous ones. Surely we have a great history of political divisions but the differences aren't more of the similarities... and it is only natural for a state to have different dialects and tradition whatever you go. What it is importat is that there are also a common language and commo traditions, believes, hystory,... Reasoning like you do will delegitimaze every states on Earth. By the way there is a difference between Italin identity and Italian nationalism. Nationalistic movements are things created only from XIX century. And by the way irredentism is a thing very different from racism.And by the way irredentism is a thing very different from racism. If there is a region in  Europe that surely is the "most ethnically and culturally diverse regions in Europe" is ex-Iugoslavia and it saddened me to see all those people give credit to racist and nationalistic thoughts about who is the original settler of that region, who has the right to live in that place, who is a memeber of a "real" nation and who isn't, and bullshit like this, which led and are still leading to war and etnic cleasings.AndreaFox  Knock here... 14:33, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italianist ideology vs the notion of an 'Italian' people 

message: This article could use an explicit list or chart of which territories ended up being part of Italy, and which didn't. It's rather unclear from reading the intro and the map, and there is no subsection in the TOC which logically has this information. -- Beland (talk) 16:06, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs clear explanation of outcome 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Italian irredentism. 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/20071222134740/http://worldatwar.net/nations/other/fiume/ to http://worldatwar.net/nations/other/fiume/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071222134740/http://worldatwar.net/nations/other/fiume/ to http://worldatwar.net/nations/other/fiume/
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) 22:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Italian irredentism. 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/20080510032637/http://www.bartleby.com/65/ir/irredent.html to http://www.bartleby.com/65/ir/irredent.html
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130217212248/http://nacional.hr/articles/view/21074/ to http://nacional.hr/articles/view/21074/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715084942/http://www.pioneer-investors.com/news2.asp?newsid=590 to http://www.pioneer-investors.com/news2.asp?newsid=590
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110608080102/http://www.b92.net/eng/news/region-article.php?yyyy=2007&mm=12&dd=13&nav_id=46152&version=print to http://www.b92.net/eng/news/region-article.php?yyyy=2007&mm=12&dd=13&nav_id=46152&version=print
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080412081409/http://www.r-1.hr/view.asp?idp=7396&c=5 to http://www.r-1.hr/view.asp?idp=7396&c=5
*Added  tag to http://www.totalportal.hr/firedesk/Hrvatska/Doga%F0aji/marka-rijeka.jpg
*Added  tag to http://www.totalportal.hr/firedesk/Hrvatska/Doga%F0aji/marka-rijeka.jpg
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120521185525/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Irredentists to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Irredentists
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) 17:18, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A couple of those paragraphs are taken word for word from the 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica (the cited source), and other paragraphs are nearly identical to the original. WritingMan (talk) 22:07, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarism in "19th century" section 

message: The whole irredentism movement has always been about the unification and freedom of the italian peoples. In particular of those lving in the austro-hungarian empire. Italians in fact did live in the modern day region of Firuli-venezia-giulia and the province of Trento, but falied to do so in Bolzano/Bozen province (aka South Tyrol). The closest thing to italians are the ladin people. These, however, cannot be considered as italian, and actually never were. Not even by romans, as the region was populated by the people of Raetia, not tecnically romans.
Thus, irredentism never actually seeked to annex the province of Bolzano to Italy, at least not for cultural reasons, but rather purely because of strategic reasons.
This is just marginally mentioned in the introduction of the article, while it has been a major concern for both the fascist government and the republican one, and results in the modern situation of a region (unsurprisingly called Trentino-Alto Adige) made up by two provinces almost independent to each other, which is unique in Italy, even in so called "regioni a statuto speciale". 
This misunderstanding of the term terre irredente, which is widespread also in the italian population, has had many important consequences. one of which is the impact on Austro-Italian relations up until the late 80's- early 90's, where finally austria renounced to its claims, although requiring great protection of german-speaking people's rights in the province (this also allowed the Austrians to finally enter the EU).
Last but not least, there has arguably been a rise in tensions between the governemnts of Bolzano, Vienna and Rome: in december 2017 the newly appointed austrian chancellor Sebastian Kurz proposed to give the german and ladin population in south tyrol a double citizenship, with far-right italian leader Giorgia Meloni warning the austrian about attacking Italy.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.18.27.15 (talk) 16:32, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: we defeated you in WW1 and will defeat you again if you try something. 174.92.105.60 (talk) 19:39, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  South Tyrol is misunderstood 

message: In 2014 Meloni called Istria and Dalmatia to be returned to Italy:
https://www.telegram.hr/politika-kriminal/buduca-talijanska-premijerka-svojata-dijelove-hrvatske-bila-je-zgrozena-nasim-ulaskom-u-eu/
In the article there is a link to the Facebook post in question, and in the comment wall of the post the comment in which the return of Istria and Dalmatia to Italy is suggested is the top comment of the post.
I think that the comments made by signora Meloni and signore Tajani are noteworthy and merit mention in the article, in its section on irredentism since World War II, because of the then and especially now important positions of these two. RickyRr (talk) 18:17, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irredentism today: FDI, Meloni's 2014 Facebook comment about Istria and Dalmatia and Tajani's 2019 chant "Long live Italian Istria and Dalmatia!" 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Overlinked in the Italian irredentism by region paragraph. JackkBrown (talk) 20:03, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Where would the overlinking be? It seems to me that the section is normally linked. --LukeWiller (talk) 20:40, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  no, for example the wikilink "Italy" in this paragraph is repeated many times (I counted four, but it could be more). JackkBrown (talk) 20:50, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, but the paragraph is not long: superfluous links can be easily removed without tags. --LukeWiller (talk) 20:56, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've just solved the problem, now I will check that something isn't missing. JackkBrown (talk) 21:06, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

text:  If you want, check if everything is OK or if other repetitive wikilinks need to be removed. JackkBrown (talk) 21:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay, I'll take a look at the paragraph in the next few days. --LukeWiller (talk) 22:33, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  OVERLINKED