Talk:Italy

European Countries v. USA

Why is it that whenever wiki writers write articles about countries in Europe they read like travel brochures, whereas the article about the United States reads like one long winded political rant from a Soviet propaganda machine?

Defining Italy

Could the pro-European Union Wikipedia editors calm down a little bit? The European Union is NOT a country; it's just an organization. A country or sovereign state usually has all its member states use the same currency. The United Kingdom has opted out from using the euro, and chances are it will withdraw from that organization soon or later. You can't just define Italy as a "republic within the European Union," though you may explain later that the country is a member of this organization. Therefore I'm changing the definition to "a republic in Southern Europe." --Nosugarcoating (talk) 16:10, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Oppose to your edit. This is your private opinion. We know, EU is not country (anywhere in Wikipedia does not say that this is country) and this is not "just" organization. EU is a'la supranational entity, similarly to federation, operates on the similarly principle as the country. Topic about UK and euro is not related to this because EU is not country. Could the anty-European Union Wikipedia editors (including you) calm down a little bit? Subtropical-man (talk) 14:46, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

So, you have decided to stalk me by following all my edits. I won't even say anything as I know you're just looking for trouble. Meanwhile, I have to leave this message just in case: (I'm using the UK relevantly as an example because it is also a member of the EU) the UK is a country that is a member of the EU, however the UK isn't defined as "a republic within the European Union." Uniform style is a known style of Wikipedia. It's enough that it is explained later that the countries are members of the EU, but you can't just start the first sentence of the definition as "a republic within the European Union." I also believe the recent Oxford dictionary definition of each European country is accurate (which doesn't say they are republics within the European Union). The EU is also not a federation, no matter how close it looks like or you wish it to be. Have a nice day. Stay away from trouble. It seems I need to inspect all articles that mention the EU to make sure things are presented accurately so as to not deceive the readers. Nice to meet you. I'm a citizen of United Nations confederation. Ha! No, I'm a citizen of the United States, a real federation, a real country with all states using the same currency, and a real superpower :) --Nosugarcoating (talk) 14:52, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Is there a way to word it better something like - is a unitary parliamentary republic in Southern Europe and a founding member state of the European Union. ????? -- Moxy (talk) 15:17, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Nosugarcoating, do you know what a republic is? From your comments you don't appear to! Anyway, it is perfectly acceptable to describe Italy as a republic within the European Union, because that is what it is. Italy's political status is defined by both Italy and the EU. May I also remind you that the British Empire and the USSR were both Superpowers in their time, and - like the European Union - were a collection/union of countries! Antiochus the Great (talk) 15:20, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Agree with Moxy. The EU is (at least) a confederation, being a member is extremely relevant. --Felisopus (talk) 16:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

This same adit in Talk:France#Defining_France. Again: Nosugarcoating wrote: "can't just start the first sentence...", no, you wrong, one can. United Nations is organisation, mode of action is very different from USA or EU. Nosugarcoating wrote: " I'm a citizen of the United States, a real federation, a real country with all states using the same currency, and a real superpower" - I guessed, had to be a reason for this anti-EU behavior. Subtropical-man (talk) 16:46, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Again, it is perfect to define Italy the way it's been defined by reputable dictionaries. It's perfect that within the article there's a description that Italy is a founding member of the EU. The article is very okay the way it currently is. Oh and, even though I'm American, I support the EU. I have British relatives in Europe. The UK has its own monarch, so that disqualifies EU's status as confederation or federation. The British Empire had only one emperor or monarch, and none of the member countries had its own separate monarch. The USSR had one centralized Head of Government, and all the member countries adopted and used the same Soviet currency. --Nosugarcoating (talk) 20:52, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

You wrote: "The UK has its own monarch, so that disqualifies EU's status as confederation or federation" - no, does not disqualify. You have very little knowledge of political science. It does not matter. A federation is a political entity characterized by a union of self-governing states. Simple. Your text about British Empire and USSR is littering discussion. You still repeating the same nonsense. Status of UK anyone not interested here. Currency also does not matter: Ecuador, Panama and some other uses United States dollar, Andorra, Monaco, Vatican and some other (non EU states) uses Euro, after all, these are independent countries. Also, for example Gibraltar (part of United Kingdom) uses own currency but this is not independent country. Currency does not matter. European Union not have need to own currency, like as Ecuador, Panama, Andorra, Monaco, Vatican and very many other countries. Again, you have very little knowledge of political science, you need to have a basic knowledge of policies, if you want to further discuss. Subtropical-man (talk) 21:51, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Nosugarcoating you said: "The British Empire had only one emperor or monarch, and none of the member countries had its own separate monarch." This is not true. Even under British rule, India had its own Princes and Royalty, so too did many of its other colonies. That is why the British Monarch was styled Emperor over some colonies and as King/Queen over others. In the early 1900s many British colonies maintained their own independent armed forces and governments. The British Empire is a perfect example of a superpower derived from a gathering of nations and peoples.Antiochus the Great (talk) 10:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Official name of the Italian state in English

This is a bit strange, but despite common sense, the Italian government [sent a letter to the UN ten years ago] clarifying that it preferred to be known in English as the "Republic of Italy" rather than the "Italian Republic." I have not found any more recent contrary authority, so it would appear that "Republic of Italy" remains the official name of the Italian state in English. It is true that Repubblica italiana ought to translate to "Italian Republic," and "Republic of Italy" more closely tracks Repubblica d'Italia (which is not the name of the Italian state in Italian), but since governmental decisions on the name of the state in a foreign language are essentially definitive, we should not have any problems making the move. Obviously, the name would have to be sourced; I would also recommend including a note within the ref to the effect "Officially; Repubblica italiana literally translates to "Italian Republic."" I would normally do this without asking, but since this is a rather prominent change about which some might get confused I felt it best to see if anyone had any serious objections. Lockesdonkey (talk) 18:42, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

• Seeing no objections, I'm making the change. Lockesdonkey (talk) 17:50, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Prehistory

There's no mention about the nuragic civilization and of shardana in Sardinia. A very important part of the italian prehistory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.56.121.13 (talk) 11:49, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 3 September 2013

Please change "Italy still receives development assistance from the European Union every year. Between 2000 and 2006, Italy received €27.4 billion from the EU.[111]" to "Italy is the third net contributor to European Budget in 2011 after Germany and France". References: "And despite its recent economic crisis did not receive any bailout program from the EU from any of its financial mechanisms (ESN) while providing its full support to these financial programs."

Giuseppe.di caro (talk) 06:35, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

 Done Alex2006 (talk) 06:49, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

This sentence needs redoing

"Between the late 19th century and the early 1900s, The new Kingdom of Italy quickly industrialized and acquired a vast a colonial empire in Africa."

Presumably should be:

"Between the late 19th century and the early 1900s, the new Kingdom of Italy quickly industrialized and acquired a vast colonial empire in Africa." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.225.198.108 (talk) 20:43, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Why is there a redirection from Austrian_Empire to Italy?

When searching for Austrian Empire a choice is presented to Austrian_Empire(Italy) which directs to the page for Italy. This seems out of place. --Skater00 (talk) 14:50, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

2 things

Many people write articles or change articles without having idea.Ignorance is in Wikipedia too.What scares me is the acknowldege of controllers. Italy is member of the G7 that you removed liked the word "main" that was before "middle power".A lot of fantasy in this article.Greetings!!!151.40.7.192 (talk) 07:29, 21 September 2013 (UTC)