Jump to content

Talk:Anti-Italianism: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SineBot (talk | contribs)
m Signing comment by Philantonia - ""
No edit summary
Line 181: Line 181:
I am removing the NPOV alert placed by an anonymous contributor on June 24, 2011. Given that this anonymous contributor has not made clear what the basis is for raising this alert, and since I do not share this opinion, I am removing it. If the anonymous contributor, or anyone else, wishes to reinstate the NPOV alert, I believe they should make known their concern so that the article can be modified to reflect their concerns.
I am removing the NPOV alert placed by an anonymous contributor on June 24, 2011. Given that this anonymous contributor has not made clear what the basis is for raising this alert, and since I do not share this opinion, I am removing it. If the anonymous contributor, or anyone else, wishes to reinstate the NPOV alert, I believe they should make known their concern so that the article can be modified to reflect their concerns.
Philantonia <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Philantonia|Philantonia]] ([[User talk:Philantonia|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Philantonia|contribs]]) 17:26, 19 July 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Philantonia <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Philantonia|Philantonia]] ([[User talk:Philantonia|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Philantonia|contribs]]) 17:26, 19 July 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Anti italianism bad antiserab good?
I don't get it is it some kind of lobistic thing. You wrote on serbophobia page how antiserbian and serbophobia was created during 90. Now I am not of those nationalistic serbs but during my 20 years of life all I hear is bad thins abouth my people and aqbout people like italinas who had Al Capone Napoleon Musolini and all those criminals including Nazi pope etc etc you speak all good. Anti serbian is created during five centuries of slavery. I'm not proud to be a Searb because I know serbs mena slave, but c'mon people I'm bombarded wit lobistic preeching...Not to mention Belrusconi a man who has 90 years and molest young girls...

Revision as of 15:22, 9 September 2011

WikiProject iconDiscrimination Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Source needed (Italian American Internment during World War II)

Italians in internment camps? Is there a source for this? Italian-Americans were among the highest representatives that fought for the USA in WW2.Yukirat 05:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A source is not needed, Italian internment, though not as well known as Japanese internment, is nevertheless a widely known and accepted fact of american history under FDR. --NEMT 21:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think that only those who did not have United States citizenship were interned (unlike the Japanese, where American citizens were also interned). The current wording is a little misleading... AnonMoos 13:16, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AnonMoos, are you saying that French, Swedesh, Irish, Canadian folks etc - and other notAmerican citizens - were also interned like the Japanese, Italians and ItalianAmericans? Lol, you are funny, mate! Try reading something serious about Anti-Italianism. Yukirat, contact the OSIA, they ll help you to find the sources. --Bigben 16:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What the heck do you even think you're talking about?? Please do try actually reading what I write next time -- it may end up saving effort and creating less unpleasantness all around.
As I rather clearly stated above, my understanding is that only those Italians (and Germans) in the U.S. who were NOT UNITED STATES CITIZENS were detained, while Japanese were detained whether they were U.S. citizens or not (except in Hawaii). Therefore the use of the words "Italian-Americans" in the section is rather misleading. AnonMoos 15:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


La Cosa Nostra

Is this link really appropriate? --NEMT 21:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has nothing to do. Unfortunately, the racism still exists. --Bigben 16:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged anti-Italianism in the United States Democratic Party

This section strains hard, but fails, to draw a general point (that there is widespread, or substantial, or at least notable anti-Italian sentiment in the Democratic Party, and apparently only in the Democratic Party among political parties) by relying on scattered anecdotes that simply do not add up to a pattern of anti-Italianism by Democrats. These few anecdotes--some of them even of questionable anti-Italian intent--are not justification for trying to stick an "anti-Italian" label on the Democratic Party. (Nor, I believe, could one justifiably put a section like this in the article on the Republican Party) Gathering "evidence," like that presented here, is only part of the process; you also have to assess its importance and significance. To use these spindly reeds to suggest something general in the attitude of the Democratic Party toward Italian-Americans is a leap too far. I propose the section be deleted. RickDC 21:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. All of those quotes, even if taken wildly out of context, would not demonstrate any serious anti-Italianism. MorrisGregorian 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The topic heading should not be anti-Italianism in the Democratic party. However, instead of deletion, the section should be reworked to leave these examples (and add others) to show that public displays of anti-Italianism are seen even in the highest levels of government. This racial stereotyping and innuendo of Italian Americans would never be tolerated, or ignored by the media, if it was directed against most other ethnic groups. The point of the section is misdirected at Democrats but there is value in retaining the core information.--Ana Nim 14:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree, paesan. I find it amazing how people can get away with directing disparaging innuendos and stereotypes towards Italians, when any stereotyping against any other ethnic group would never be tolerated. However, perhaps the title should be changed. --Callmarcus 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Even if the section were retitled and the focus reworked, so that the Democratic Party was no longer the focal point, the scattered anecdotes seem thin proof or even evidence of anything notable beyond the fact that people occasionally say things that can be interpreted as (and sometimes are) "anti-[fill in the blank]" This point could apply to almost any group in society, and to make it here, so weakly, does a disservice to the preceding sections of the article, in which good points are made well. I still recommend that the section be deleted entirely; I don't see a ready way to improve it to the point where it would add value to the article. In any event, certainly the focus ought not to be on one political party. RickDC 23:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS. As a side note, a Mayor in a suburban New York town (the name of the exact town escapes me) recently responded to questions from an Italian American school board official by stating "Because I don't like guineas." I find it amazing how little attention was given to the incident.

I've retitled the section, to remove the focus on solely the Democratic Party. I've reworded the text. I've also deleted the paragraph on New Jersey, which has no substance to it--just that two Italian-Americans in NJ didn't like Menendez's vote against Alito. I still strongly believe the section should be deleted entirely. It's a weak and insubstantial segment for an encyclopedia article. I've only tried to eliminate its anti-Democratic focus. RickDC 00:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If this is true about Democrats are ethnically biased towards Italians, then the housespeaker Nancy Pelosi is in the wrong political party to begin with...why not switch to the Republicans to sit next to...who else, Rudolph Giuliani? I don't know what political party Mario Cuomo is with (Dems? Reps?), but what about 1920's NY mayor La Guardia...was he a Dem or a Rep? Time to search and find out, but I'm so sorry for Ms. Pelosi represents the Democrat Party and she's an Italian-American! 63.3.14.1 16:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do we really need such an article?

There isn't a single verifiable statement in this page. I would like to see any evidence for Italian culture being significantly different <<from that of the mainstream identity of white people and Western European cultures>>. And anyway, are racial stereotypes like this worth an article on a reputable encyclopedia? --Fertuno 00:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • There might be claims in this that are invalid, but anti-Italianism certainly existed in US history and the history of a few other nations. See Google books on Anti-Italianism. (I took off Chomsky's because they seem to be irrelevant) I think it'd be better to ask "do we need this article as it is now" or "this article is done badly and needs better sourcing." You can add the appropriate tags to indicate it needs improvement. Some statements I made like a year ago, when I didn't understand Wikipedia as well, are there unaltered and probably need sourced.--T. Anthony 13:49, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • As an Italian American who has been discriminated against and has had family members discriminated against, I find your statement extremely offensive. Sources can be found for almost everything on this page. You seem to have an agenda. - 16 December 2006 UTC
Offensiveness is a purely subjective matter. As an Italian I rather find offensive someone who says Italian culture <<significantly differs from that of the mainstream identity of white people and Western European cultures>>, which means absolutely nothing and it's probably written by someone who haven't the faintest idea about European and Italian cultures and how each other are related. This is an article about old 19th Century North American stereotypes about Italians, and it fall exactly in those stereotypes. Nothing to be astonished at. So, as long as this is an encyclopedia and nobody produced verifiable sources for that, I'm going to delete it. --Fertuno 12:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


How is the truth offensive? Censoring and erasing this page will not bring an end to anti-Italianism, if that's what you think. If you erase this, next it will be the anti-Semitism page, the Racism page, and so on. Just because you have some bizarre shame of the past does not mean we should erase it. Callmarcus 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Have you ever read Wikipedia policies about verifiability?. I'm afraid you don't, because the very first period states that "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". This is an encyclopedia, draft with scientific method, so you have to provide the truths you add to the article with reliable sources, tipically reputable third-party published sources. That's all. As long as you don't provide sources for your statements, those sentences should go. --Fertuno 10:53, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A source has been added. Hundreds more similar sources can be added as well. -- The Truthish 17:40 19 December 2006

I will try to point out what I wrote on it.wikipedia about the very same matter: I think the real problem of this article is that it messes two different aspects that are someways linked, but have not the same degree of interest.

  • On one side, we have all those terms and phrases that are closer to the commonplace and stereotype about Italians ("thieves, mafiosi, latin-lovers" — etc.). Every country has this kind of stereotypical opinions about other countries. I think it is rude but unavoidable without a proper education. In Italy itself there are lots of stereotypes about other peoples: Romanì are thieves, French people do not wash themselves. There are even stereotypes going from region to region!

If such an article is to be written, I strongly suggest we find evidences in statistical studies about the opinion people from other countries have about Italians. The only kind of evidence I would accept is of the following kind: "out of a sample of 3000 German people interviewed in our inquiry, it came out the stereotype against Italians is that of the criminals".

  • On the other side, there is real discrimination. It happens when people goes over a still rude stereotype and act according to their false beliefs about an unspecified group of people that are supposed to share the same characteristics and aspects. When people are discriminated, they are not likely to be employed by other people that belong to the discriminating group and they are even likely to be mistreated, threatened and not to get a rightful judgment when they appeal to a local court. Discrimination could go far and became apartheid when the State itself makes rule in order to legalize such a discrimination and the enforces them with its institutions.

If such an article is to be written, I strongly suggest we find evidences of past and present discrimination: the (true) claim that Italians were categorized as "semi-white" by Australian authorities should be sourced by someone who had a chance to read a survey or is able to show pictures about immigration documents in XX century Australia.
That is to say that even if I have some friends who were beaten and attacked while they were in Edinburgh just because it was "the Italian day" (Friday is UK's payday and some people usually get drunk and threaten violence against tourists or immigrants), I need some article to prove that such a phenomenon is widespread and typical. MarcelloPapirio (talk) 16:42, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2005 Cronulla riots (Australia)

I disagree with the POV and content of this article in principle. Nonetheless, it exists so I think there should be some degree of fact. I've never been to Australia but I understand that originally 'wog' was a derogatory term for Italians and Greeks. With the increase of immigrants from the middle-east since the 1980s, this term came to be applied to them as well. From what I gather, the riots at Cronulla were not aimed at Italians but represented the growing xenophobia towards Muslims. I modified the article to soften the inclusion of Italians, but perhaps it should be removed completely. Mariokempes 22:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could not find any support for this statement. Removed. Mariokempes 16:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I live in Australia and am of Italian descent. The term wog first was used against Greeks and Italians but now anyone from a number of different Southern European countries get the name. Cronulla was against Lebanese after attacks against whites were reported; some say the attacks were actually done by Turkish gang members rather then Lebanese but white Aussies just assumed it was the Lebanese. At the riot both Arabs and any other darker skinned people were targeted. Alexbonaro 04:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Flagged for clean up

I've tagged this for clean up due to:

  • The presence of uncited direct quotations
  • A heavy reliance on weasel words throughout
  • Possible original research
  • The rather unconvincing assertion that calling a politician "fascist" is an incident of anti-Italianism (consider: Fascist (epithet))

--88.149.173.98 16:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Issues that still need addressed (May 2007):

  • U.S.-centrism: I'm assuming that the focus on the US (aside from two brief paragraphs) is reflective of systematic bias rather than reality.
  • Stereotypes of Italians and Italian Americans: This section probably needs completely rewritten or removed, as it relies largely on weasel words and unverified (and unverifiable) statements.
  • Violence Against Italians
    • Find citations for the following:
      • "the second most likely group to be lynched"
      • "the lynching of eleven Italians in the city of New Orleans"
      • ""were nearly deafening"" (Apparently a quote from somewhere)
      • "one newspaper reported..." (direct quote needs cited)
      • S&V were executed partially "due to their Italian ancestry"
      • S&V were convicted "despite the lack of evidence"
    • Weasel words:
      • "most historians agree" that S&Z's trial was unfair; How many are most? Who says this, when do they say it, and where do they say it?
  • Italian American internment during World War II
    • "One official stated..." (indirect quote needs cited)
    • "Bill Clinton made a public declaration" (would benefit from citation)
  • Anti-Italianism in politics
    • Weasel words:
      • "It was argued..."
      • "was seen by some of his supporters"
      • "Opponents of Alito's nomination countered..."
      • "which some interpreted as an ethnic slur"
      • "which was also interpreted by some as a derogatory"

--Ringtail Jack 14:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clinton and the "Mafioso" comment"

The article had been edited to state that "President Bill Clinton once referred to Governor of New York Mario Cuomo as a "Mafioso". This is incorrect on several levels. First, he was not president at the time of the comment. Second, Clinton himself never used the word. In response to a comment by Gennifer Flowers that "I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't have some Mafioso major connections," then-Governor Clinton said, "Well, he acts like one." Here is one of many sources quoting the exchange: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE3D71438F933A05752C0A964958260 I think the exchange still has a place in the article, but it should be done to correctly reflect Clinton's comment.--Ana Nim (talk) 13:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC) lalalalalalalalala —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.188.140.184 (talk) 05:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quota

It should probably be noted that the 1921 (and, later, 1924--See Emergency Quota Act and Johnson-Reed Act) quota regarding the number of Italian immigrants allowed into the US applied not only to Italians, but to all immigrants from the Eastern Hemisphere. This quota was put in place largely as a result of post-WWI US isolationism-- as well as anti-Chinese sentiment (and, later, anti-Japanese sentiment) following the downturn of the 1848-49 Gold Rush in California--in fact, the 1924 Act specifically barred all Asians from entering the country. How the article reads now implies that the quota was specifically targeted at Italian immigrants, a grossly misleading insinuation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.252.53 (talk) 15:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, the immigration act was a result of increased nativist sentiment among White American, esp. that of "WASPs" against foreign born persons entering to live or work in the USA. Also during the 1920's and 30's was a spike rise and fall trend of Mexicans and Puerto Ricans, two other nationalities who are "Latino" began to be treated alot worse than older established or "lighter skinned" European immigrants (white ethnics) to indicate the complete acceptance of them such as Italians. During the gold rush, there were Chilean and Peruvian miners in the Californian coasts and sierras that encountered mob violence and expulsion from neighborhoods, in part of anti-Mexican and xenophobic feel among white Anglo Americans there. + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 10:03, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Guinea (ethnic slur)

Guinea (ethnic slur) redirects here, but there's no mention of that in this article, other than a pointless link to that redirect. It looks like that this has been the subject of an incomplete transwiki to Wiktionary here. We need to resolve this, not least so as I can figure out who's who in The Departed. -- 87.112.6.240 (talk) 23:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anti Italianism in Yugoslavia

There was wide spread Anti Italianism at the end of WW2 with regards to the slavs when they invaded and occupied Istria and then Trieste for a month. During this time many Italians were murdered and thrown into Foibes (caves), this was known as the Foibe Massacres. Also during this time 300,000 Italians were forced to flee their homes due to Yugoslav persecution. Rodolfo Graziani (talk) 17:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... 'anti-Italianism' bad, 'anti-Irishism' and 'anti-Germanism' good?

This article is a joke and REALLY needs to be deleted. Amongst its many faults, as it asks us to take note of alleged widespread bigotry against Italians, it shamelessly slanders the Irish and Germans as bigots! This is nothing but an expression of Italian-American bigoted stereotypes about others. This article is clearly the work of ignorant, bigoted, cafones; the article suggests some over priveleged, under witted Italian-Amerian kids have had their minds destroyed by 'whiteness studies' propoganda. LOL. Or Cry out loud, I'm not sure which is more appropriate.

The country is named for an Italian, for crisakes. Stop your whiny bitching. I thought Italians were supposed to be tough guys? You P.C. identity politics victim mongers make me ashamed to be of Italian descent.

P.S.: The article actually refers to “U.S. Americans” at one point. SIGH! :( Modnartag (talk) 02:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The social status of Italians in American society is generally positive and not to sound like CNN's Rick Sanchez commenting on "Jews had it better than blacks or Latinos in the USA", there is less avert prejudice or discrimination against Italians in this country, but I don't deny it does occur on occassion. You could refer them as a model minority in the same fashion given to Asian-Americans, esp. Indians and the Japanese, two other ethnic groups experienced a harsher type of racism based on skin color and racial appearance in American history. + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 09:59, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Racism in Italy

Would there be a page somewhere to examine the allegations of racism in Italy in recent times ? There have been major riots against Romanian minorities. Some have also reported historical or current discriminations against Blacks, Jews, Arabs and others. ADM (talk) 08:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I meant to respond that I created such an article and placed it in "see also."--T. Anthony (talk) 18:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Italians are not dark skinned

I have always noticed that Americans use to portrait Italians, Greeks and Iberians as dark or olive skinned. That's not true. Only very few Italians from certain territories in southern Italy have LIGHT dark skin, because they probably have arabian people among their ancestors (because of the islamic invasion of southern Italy between 827 and 1091). I am Italian and surely my skin is white. I ask to remove every reference in the article about Italians being dark skinned, because this is a racist statement that dates back to the beginning of XX century, when it was introduced by anglo-americans in order to justify racism against the italian immigrates coming to the U.s.a.

Speaking of racism in Italy: i don't know what they say to you about my country, but in Italy there have never been "riots" against strangers, but only pacific demonstrations of protest against them (I'm not going to explain the reasons behind these protests, as it would be too long). However this article is about racism against italians not about italian racism, which is dealed about in other articles. It's sad thinking someone aim to include in this page news about italian racism: it seems to me a way to justify racism against Italians ("we are racist against italians, but they are racist so they deserve it!"). Very sad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.36.133.11 (talk) 17:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Italian and I have dark skin, but I'm not ashamed of it. What's wrong with dark or olive skin, which many Mediterraneans possess? 68.36.66.79 (talk) 22:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are lighter-skinned Italians in the North. Some paintings from Renaissance Florence show light-skinned red-heads and I don't think these were all fantasy images. However I believe Italian immigration to the US tended to be more from the Southern half of Italy. Argentina, as I recall, received more Northern Italians in per-capita terms.--T. Anthony (talk) 09:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mediterranean populations are by and large 'olive skinned.' You need not look further than the populations of Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and France to determine this. The existence of olive skin in Italian populations could stem in part from the fact that much of Southern Italy (I'm including Sicily here as well) was colonized by another Mediterranean people- The Greeks. I cannot speak of what the native inhabitants looked liked when the Greeks arrived in Southern Italy. However, they were probably olive skinned considering the fact that they were a stone's throw away from Greece and that they were situated in the Mediterranean as well. However, that is conjecture. Northern Italians may be deemed fairer due to influences from Germanic peoples. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegz1 (talkcontribs) 16:21, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Souternh Italy are all black...but Souternh Italy was conquered by Vikings (descendants)...but ...wait...what i see??!!1 also England was conquered Vikings (descendants)....but then we could say.......please stop with these bullshits!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pasq789 (talkcontribs) 11:45, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Curtis Sliwa's Comments

Curtis Sliwa, on his nationally syndicated radio show stated that Italians don't need an Italian American museum, because it will be run by the Mafia. He also stated that he could swing a cat in there and every fifth person he hit would be mafia. Moreover, he claimed that 'museum contributions' will be made because mafia enforcers will request it once you walk in. Again, this story is a matter of fact, not fiction. Moreover, the sources are highly reliable and the information provided here is neutral. Along with the story of Sliwa's comments is Sliwa's letter of apology, where he stated that he did not intend for his comments to be an attack on the Italian community.

What if he made the same idiotic style of commentary about the Holocaust memorial Museum and the National Civil Rights Museum? Silwa would been sued, fired or even charged with group libel against Jews, African-Americans and other groups fought for civil rights or were victims of the Nazi genocide. It is convenient or "less controversial" to make a comment degrading Italian-Americans for Silwa to jack up the radio show's ratings. It is no longer "taboo" to pick on Italians for having an ethnic heritage, compared to attacking people of color and other religions, but the results are the same and Silwa has offended Italians for being "different". + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 09:55, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jersey Shore Controversy

The largest Italian American organizations have come out stating that MTV's use (the network itself used the term) of the term Guido to describe a group of Italian American cast members was derogatory, offensive and a mass propagation of an ethnic slur against Italians. There is little to no evidence that the term Guido has been 'adapted' to be an acceptable way to refer to an Italian. The word's historic use is that of hatred, and continues to be. The use of this term in MTV's promos which were scripted with voice-over work (not the use of the word by cast) is the exact definition of anti-Italian. All quotes and statements have reliable, trustworthy sources and should not be removed. The statements are neutral and reported as facts, not opinions. If Rev. Wright's 'Garlic Noses' comment is to remain in the article (as it very well should), MTV referring to Italian Americans by an ethnically derisive term should remain in place as well.

If the validity of the sources is to be judged- there is a link to the letter the NIAF mailed directly to Viacom (MTV's parent company) denouncing the use of the term Guido to describe the cast. Moreover, there are Fox News and CNN reports on the statements made by the Italian American group UNICO on the subject of the Jersey Shore. If someone is to remove this information, which again has been presented in a neutral, bare-facts manner, they are the ones injecting their opinion into the structure and substance of this article. We cannot treat the MTV controversy as just a blip on the radar. It is not a personal story about how someone called one individual a guido-it is major, national, headline news. - signed by anon IP

The liberal media claims they are fighting racism and group stereotypes of all kinds, including that of Italians. You could have mentioned in the 1970's there was some protests about the Godfather movie trilogy depicted Italians were highly involved in organized crime. But the movie was primarily received warmly in the Italian community, since the movie was directed by Francis Ford Coppola of Italian descent and based on the novel by Italian-American writer Mario Puzo. But ironically, Marlon Brando was not Italian, except the film's Don Corleone character has a human not caricatural feature of a person from an Italian culture. The movie displays with accuracy no exaggerations and some of the characters spoke Italian or Sicilian dialogue with subtitles in the film. The major difference is that you won't find seriously offensive material about Italian people whether are American or from Italy, on The Godfather movie trilogy, while Jersey Shore is completely an act on what's depicted a "reality show" though not intented to be offensive portrayals of Italians, Jews, people from New Jersey or New York. + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 09:53, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Christ Crucifixion reference

I am removing (for a second time) the concept that some responsibility for Christ's crucifixion was a source of anti-Italianism in the period of mass immigration. I have done a Google search to see what I could find on this issue. The only thing that comes up is the Wikipedia article. Furthermore, the cited reference "La Storia" makes no mention at all of this. Philantonia

POV Alert

I am removing the NPOV alert placed by an anonymous contributor on June 24, 2011. Given that this anonymous contributor has not made clear what the basis is for raising this alert, and since I do not share this opinion, I am removing it. If the anonymous contributor, or anyone else, wishes to reinstate the NPOV alert, I believe they should make known their concern so that the article can be modified to reflect their concerns. Philantonia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philantonia (talkcontribs) 17:26, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anti italianism bad antiserab good? I don't get it is it some kind of lobistic thing. You wrote on serbophobia page how antiserbian and serbophobia was created during 90. Now I am not of those nationalistic serbs but during my 20 years of life all I hear is bad thins abouth my people and aqbout people like italinas who had Al Capone Napoleon Musolini and all those criminals including Nazi pope etc etc you speak all good. Anti serbian is created during five centuries of slavery. I'm not proud to be a Searb because I know serbs mena slave, but c'mon people I'm bombarded wit lobistic preeching...Not to mention Belrusconi a man who has 90 years and molest young girls...