Talk:Victor Emmanuel III

message: The article is contradictory.Was he a Roman Catholic or an atheist?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.40.3.178 (talk) 17:57, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Religion

message: ...if the major source about Italian kings is Mack Smith...
Whoever Mack Smith may be, he may be a "major source on Italian Kings" to those who can't read Italian; to those who can, I recommend Bartoli's La fine della monarchia; there are various editions; it is a classic, as well as an excellent synthesis on a very complex theme.
:Denis Mack Smith is the most important living English language historian of modern Italy.  There are 10,000 google hits on his name in the Italian language.  I am highly impressed by your decision to parade your ignorance as though it is superior knowledge. john k 15:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are clearly advancing a POV with this interpretation.  And what's so horrific about Giolitti, et al, anyway? At any rate, my understanding was that fear of communism had more to do with the turn to fascism than hatred of the Italian political class (of which VEIII was surely himself a most prominent part).  john k 15:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

text: The fact that the Germans were a conquering army had much to do with the fact that VEIII and his government made absolutely no effort to get the army to resist the Nazi advance, and they all basically ended up surrendering without a fight.  The behavior of the royal family and Italian government in the period between the overthrow of Mussolini and the German invasion has been frequently criticized.  Comparing it to the British royal family is silly and not very aposite, but nor is comparing it to the royal families of other countries. john k 15:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

text: This is rather silly. john k 15:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm sure if Hitler had had any members of the British royal family at his disposal, they would have been put in a concentration camp (also worth noting that many members of German royal families were also put in camps - the former Crown Prince of Bavaria, for instance).  Also, Mafalda was not murdered by the Nazis, as you seem to imply, but was killed by an allied bombing raid. john k 15:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

text: This is an interpretation, I think, that could be disputed. john k 15:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

text: The first fact should be mentioned.  I don't know why the pro-monarchy vote should be compared to a political party.  The Republicans also won more votes than any party has ever won in any election since.  And the Popular Front won 31% of the vote in 1948, which was, well, a fairly sizeable fraction of the votes that the monarchy garnered in the referendum.  And that election was widely held to have been tampered with by the CIA to keep the leftist vote down.  At any rate, all this proves is that a lot of centrists and conservatives voted against the monarchy. john k 15:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Surely Victor Emmanuel bears the blame for Caporetto nearly as much as he does for Mussolini.  Salandra and Sonnino could never have started a war without the king's acquiescence.  I don't think Victor Emmanuel was a bad man, necessarily (his grandson, on the other hand, seems rather horrifyingly awful...), but that doesn't mean that we should whitewash his failings, which were numerous. john k 15:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tantris's complaints

message: With some shoots Mussolini could be defeated easily,in 1922, but this king accepted fascism.When Etiopia and Albania were invaded by italian forces, this despicable king became "king" of both of these countries.I read in a book, that this king didn't read any book, in his long life.He wasn't just wicked and dumb.This king was also a coward.In 1943, he fled all his doomed people, for safety, again without giving any order, for any shoot.With the possible exception of Benito Mussolini any other italian was so bad, as this despicable king. When this royal family was deposed and exiled, Italian miracle began.He deserved to be hanger by his awfull crimes and mistakes.Agre22 (talk) 16:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: He was a dumb and bad king

message: Is it known if he had any illegitimate children and if so are there ant records of there names and where they were born?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.1.149.192 (talk) 22:30, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illegitimate Children 

message: In the section on his final efforts to save the crown it mentions that Rome was bombed for the first time in it's 2,500 year history. I don't think it being bombed for the "first" time in a history that spans 2,500 years is really accurate. The city of Rome may have been directly bombed for the first time in WWII by modern explosives but the city has been attacked, bombed (via cannon), and sacked multiple times by many different powers including the Italian government itself when taking the city from the Pope. So I think simply keeping it "Rome was bombed for the first time during the war.." would be more accurate.Coinmanj (talk) 20:15, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The bombing of Rome 

message: There is nothing here about his death.
(112.118.141.233 (talk) 01:03, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death 

message: It is a low quality article, it lacks any reference, it is full of misbegotten halftruths and tedious commonplaces.
As for Denis Mac Smith: it is true he is very much read in Italy (and elsewhere) but this is only a sign of the provincialism of the Italian public.  Serious Italian scholars do not consider his works as authoritative. He misunderstood most of what he wrote about. Even though I am not a historian I attended lessons of Italian scholarly historians. E. g.: he wrote Cavour's main worry was Garibaldi, whereas documents prove Cavour's main worry was with his elder brother, the Marquis, who did not allow him in their ancestral home because he was a liberal and a freemason; he never gave much weight to Garibaldi's political chances as he knew Italy was in the hand of the moderati, not of the democrats. In a sense this is also relevant here. VE III did not refuse to sign the decree of siege for fear of a civil war (as he claimed), he had lost confidence in the Italian parliament and its ability to manage the long standing political and social crisis of the country and perhaps most importantly he was afraid of being put in a difficult position within his own family as the Duke of Aosta (former haed of the III Army) was a conviced supporter of  fascism.Aldrasto11 (talk) 15:10, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Above discussions 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Vittorio Emanuele III 1936.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: This section is to properly discuss the question posed, without text or signature, in the preceding section heading (which the history shows was added by an IP editor in 2012).
I believe prior versions of WP:SOVEREIGN required names of non-British European monarchs prior to the 20th century to be anglicized, while the names of such monarchs of the 20th century and later are not translated (i.e., Philip V of Spain vs. Felipe VI of Spain). Not only is this apparently the usual rule in most present media stylebooks (as suggested by the note on Felipe VI's article); but it apparently was also the rule during this king's reign in at least one U.S. newspaper, as per this June 6, 1944 front page from the Arkansas Gazette (republished by its successor the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette) containing an AP article whose text begins "King Vittorio Emanuele III abdicated as king of Italy". (This was actually his relinquishing power, but not title, after the fall of Rome; he did not formally abdicate until 1946, a month before the monarchy was abolished.) I assume this was in accordance with the AP Stylebook of that day, though I know in the decades closer to its 1991 demise the Gazette tended to follow an unwritten stylebook.
On the other hand, the present text of WP:SOVEREIGN says to use "the most common form used in current English works of general reference", or if that cannot be determined the anglicized name. (The note on Felipe VI's article I mentioned above was probably added to comply with this; though it links to one source calling him Philip VI, I agree that most sources use Felipe VI.) Though I don't claim to have the skills needed to confirm this (i.e., the complex Google searches used in most disputes of this type), most current English references I've seen call him Victor Emmanuel III, as this article does. I would suggest that an editor with more experience look into this to confirm whether most current sources use his anglicized name or his Italian name. --RBBrittain (talk) 11:49, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Victor Emmanuel or Vittorio Emanuele? 

message: Would you discuss his religion about Roman Catholicism in Italy and the Balkans, but it was unsourced, please explain. 
Unfortunately, I found only source.  --2001:4452:4AE:8A00:140D:ED1A:AEBC:4278 (talk) 09:22, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Infoboxes are not designed for complexity or nuance. If there is debate, uncertainty or a confused chronology over whether he was an atheist or Catholic, then that should be explained in the article text not contradicted or ignored by an over-simplified infobox parameter. DrKay (talk) 13:04, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Per MOS:RELIGION policy, none of the evidence were the King of Italy was an atheist, because he was a Catholic member of the House of Savoy. The religion of Kingdom of Italy during the fascist period were traditionally Roman Catholic as a state religion. --2001:4452:4AE:8A00:31C8:9235:C1E2:5AB (talk) 14:05, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Per policy, all content on wikipedia must be explicitly supported by reliable sources. DrKay (talk) 17:50, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: But it's a false claim, because the King of Italy was only a Catholic to hold the position, while Mussolini was acting himself as a atheist. --49.150.108.5 (talk) 23:08, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's unsourced, then it shouldn't be in the article. I've made that clear repeatedly. DrKay (talk) 08:31, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman Catholicism 

message: Specifically, the first paragraph of this section. Others in that section may need it too. Could anyone please tell me where to split it (or them)? Thylacine24 (talk) 03:05, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Found paragraph that needs splitting 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Victor Amadeus III of Sardinia which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 11:19, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress