The article is unclear of the role of females in the Italian military. It only gives the age ranges for males but it appears to army at least accepts females. The positions of the other branches is unclear Nil Einne 12:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Military of Italy insigna.jpg
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was not moved yet. The latest discussion at MilHist seems to indicate that this is going to be put to the wider community sometime soon. Any further moves such as these should wait for that community discussion. --Aervanath (talk) 15:59, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Various moves including Military of Italy → Armed forces of Italy listed at Wikipedia:Requested moves#6 February 2009 — Over redirect: "Armed forces" means the land army, air force and navy of a country, while "Military", while meaning the same thing, can also refer to just the land army, and thus is ambigious. Per Pervious lengthy discussions on MilHist talk page "Armed forces" is preferable to "Military" in names like this" — Pattont/c 19:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose "Military" is more concise and, quite frankly, more common. Not by much, but still more common. But in part your right. But the reason is simple. "Armed forces" has come into use more recently, when naval and air forces played a much more important role. Over the thousands of years of recorded military history (what? since biblical times?), only recently (the last 500) has naval power really meant so much, and only the last 75 has air power meant so much. And even when naval power came into force, it was not under a unified command with the army, but was often under a separate command structure (hence, the navy had its own ground forces, the marines.) Int21h (talk) 18:20, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Hello. I'm working now on "military of Italy" section editing and modifiyng in wiki.it. The new version will be more accurate and updated to the actual operative situation and national and international legislation. Please, take note of the new contents for a more accurate management of related informations. Regards. --Aeroleo (talk) 08:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
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.