Jump to content

Talk:Venetian nationalism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

neologism

[edit]

I just added the neologism template, for the same reasons that can be found in Talk:Padanism. Even if this article stays as it is, it should at least be renamed using a more widely used title. --Piccolo Modificatore Laborioso (talk) 19:27, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the neologism template considering the number of references within the article to be sufficient evidence that Venetism was an accepted term, but on a closer look I see that it's quite low in prominence. I've therefore moved the article to Veneto nationalism which brings it in line with similar articles such as Basque nationalism, Ulster nationalism, Quebec nationalism and so on and so forth. ColdmachineTalk 11:07, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The new title is simply incorrect as Venetists reject the term "nationalism" and that "Veneto" is not the correct adjective. I continue to think that the best and correct title is Venetism (Italian: Venetismo), but at least we should use Venetian autonomism. Also, before moving the category that gathers Venetist parties and associations, let's find a compromise about the title of this article. --Checco (talk) 15:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, from the article content it seems to be an "ideology, a sentiment, a form of culture, or a social movement that focuses on the nation... a type of collectivism emphasizing the collective of a specific nation" (see Nationalism). So, whether or not advocates of Veneto nationalism like the term or want to be 'labelled' by it, is moot - for the purposes of writing an encyclopaedic article we need to express a neutral point of view and bring the article in to line with existing precedence and the MoS for similar entries such as Quebec nationalism and Ulster nationalism (as two of many, many examples). ColdmachineTalk 15:43, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but in this case it is more correct to speak of "autonomism", in line with List of active autonomist and secessionist movements... Think a little bit about this and anyway "Veneto" is wrong as there is an adjective ("Venetian"): at least we should move the article to Venetian nationalism, even if, as I told you, Venetism, Venetismo (Italian name) or Venetian autonomism seem to me all better and more correct titles. --Checco (talk) 15:49, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) Okay, looking into it further I think the objectives of the Venitismo camp need to factor in to the article naming decision. Right now the article states, in the lead, that the it is an ideology and regionalist movement:

"...demanding more autonomy, or even independence from Italy, for Veneto, and promoting the re-discovery the Republic of Venice's traditions, culture and language"

(The emphasis here is mine) It boils down to these pairings:

In other words, I think 'autonomy' - as an option - is only valid if the movement desires only to be incorporated as a regione autonoma. If its ambitions are any greater then it's nationalist by definition. Hope this helps clarify where I'm coming from on this, and hopefully we can work to build a consensus based on the options and on the actual views of this movement. ColdmachineTalk 20:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Venetism is a broad movement and the difficulties about naming the article could be easily resolved turning back to Venetism (in fact it is less a neologism than Veneto nationalism!). It is a broad movement and I'm not able to tell you exactly who is part of it and who is not, how many independentists there are within it and so on. I would say that they are definitely a minority or at least the major Venetist parties are not openly pro-independence today and there is also the issue about how many Venetist are actually supporters also of Padanism!
Venetism is my first choice, Venetian autonomism the second, while I would avoid Venetian nationalism. I know people who define themselves Venetian nationalists (i.e. some members of the tiny Venetian National Party), but I still think it is not correct as a title for the article. Also Venetian regionalism is better than Veneto nationalism as the ideology of the movement is basically regionalist along with that of the parties of the European Free Alliance (of which only Liga Veneta Repubblica is a member anyway), but is less precise in my view. --Checco (talk) 13:42, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ps: It is Venetismo not Venitismo...
  • An English-speaker (this is the English Wikipedia) searching for an article on this subject might use the words "Venice" or "Venetian". They would never use "Veneto" or "Venetism". "Nationalism" does not seem right either. They might search for "autonomy", "separatism" or "independence movement". I think Venetian autonomism is good. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with this is expressed above, and there is precedence on the encyclopaedia for treatment of articles like this: 'nationalism' is used. Again, see Ulster nationalism, Quebec nationalism, Basque nationalism. They are all regional nationalism movements. Nationalism encompasses a broad range of views from regional autonomy to full independence, whereas autonomy excludes those who hold to the ideals of an independent Veneto, or restoration of the Republic of Venice, or those who are merely trying to promote the regional culture, language and so on of Veneto. As for Veneto being incorrect because this is the English Wikipedia: how? The article Veneto is called Veneto here on English Wikipedia - Venice is just a city and this nationalist movement refers to the region, not the city. This whole issue isn't resolved by WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT; it's resolved by the Manual of Style, precedent, and linking the article name to the actual content. ColdmachineTalk 14:42, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Existing precedence: a few examples

[edit]

The following is a list of articles covering the same topic, for different regions of the world which illustrates a precedence for naming convention:

and so on, and so on, and so on...

In the meantime we should move the page at list to Venetian nationalism as "Veneto" is the name of the region and it not an adjective. As we have Venetian language, we should have Venetian nationalism, or better, autonomism and I'm happy that also Aymatth2 agrees with me on this. In the meantime we wait for more users telling us their opinions, can we move the article to Venetian nationalism? --Checco (talk) 15:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, two people is not consensus, and consensus takes time to achieve. Let's continue discussing this and await third opinions from those with a neutral point of view - as a self-identified 'Venetist' (see your userpage userbox) I think we're best seeking wider consensus. ColdmachineTalk 15:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on article name

[edit]

Should the article remain at Veneto nationalism or should it be renamed to something else?

Issues

[edit]

Proposal: Article refers to ideological movement centred around the Veneto region of Italy, not the city of Venice alone. Venetian is not specific enough; it could refer to Venetian Slovenia, the historical region of Venetia (region), or any other number of things. Veneto is an article on the current region of Italy which is at the heart of the ideologies described in this article at present.

Proposal: Article spans ideological backgrounds; it covers political views on independence, on greater autonomy, on restoration of the Republic of Venice and on promotion of the cultural values (e.g. language) of the region. Nationalism is therefore an ideal naming choice since it spans this variety of ideologies: autonomy excludes those pushing for independence, independence excludes those wanting only improved autonomy (e.g. as one of the regione autonoma), regionalism excludes those who desire a restoration of the Republic of Venice and all three exclude the promotion of cultural values specific to the region.

  • Existing precedence: a few examples

The following is a list of articles covering the same topic, for different regions of the world which illustrates a precedence for naming convention:

and so on, and so on, and so on...

Proposal: The article name as it presently stands - Veneto nationalism - falls in line with existing practice on Wikipedia for the treatment of articles on similar subjects. Precedence has been established, and the name should follow existing practice to conform with the Manual of Style. ColdmachineTalk 15:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For all the reasons I stated above, Venetism is the most correct title for the article as Venetismo is the name of the movement both in Italian language and in Venetian language. I would accept also Venetist movement and Venetian autonomism basically because I think that "autonomism" is more precise than "nationalism". In any case it is important that the title does not mention "Veneto" as Venetism is supported also outside Veneto. "Venetian" refers both to Veneto and Venetia, a broader area comprising also parts of Lombardy, Trentino and Friuli-Venezia Giulia. Remember that Venetian language is spoken also in Trentino and large parts of Friuli-Venezia Giulia, notably in Trieste. "Venetian" is the correct adjective (as "Basque", "Catalan", "Andalusian", "Castillian", "Palestinian", "Scottish", etc.).
My first choice is Venetism (or Venetist movement or Venetist autonomist movement), my second choice is Venetian autonomism; I would avoid Venetian nationalism and I strongly oppose Veneto nationalism as it is fairly incorrect. --Checco (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I feel ill-qualififed to write on this subject, but was asked to, having suggested on the related CFD discussion that both the category and article should be Venetian nationalism. Various nationlist movements, such as Welsh and Breton nationalism only seek greater autonomy and protection of regional characteristics from being subsumed in the greater nation. I suggest the use of the word "Venetian" because it is the English adjective applying not only to the city of Venice, but to the former Republic of Venice. This is a case where the English name for the city is not the vernacular one, as with Brussels, Milan, Rome, Naples, Vienna, Cologne. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:44, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Venetian nationalism is the most obvious search term - Veneto and Venetism are little used in English. As the language is called Venetian and Venetian is known to apply to more than just the inhabitants of Venice, I think it is the most appropriate term. Fences and windows (talk) 17:38, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the next few days I will move the article either to Venetian nationalism (supported by most users who told us their opinion) or Venetian autonomism (supported also by Aymatth2, see above) as this is the more correct title for the article, let alone Venetism obviously which is THE name of the movement. In this respect I observe that there are many similar articles that does not respect the "XXXXX nationalism" format (see Category:Independence movements). --Checco (talk) 10:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - a move to Venetian autonomism would be against consensus. By all means move to Venetian nationalism since consensus seems to be edging towards that. You will also need to have the category renamed (which will require consensus too). I've also already explained why the examples under Category:Independence movements are irrelevant: Veneto nationalism is a nationalist movement, which encompasses some views on independence but also a whole range of other views ranging from cultural promotion to restoring the old Republic of Venice. The article title must reflect the diverse nature of the movement otherwise it goes down as being written from a biased perspective from editors with a clear conflict of interest. ColdmachineTalk 11:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think that you are a little biased and I acknowledge that you know very few things about the movement. Anyway let's have Venetian nationalism. At least for now. --Checco (talk) 12:33, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I beg your pardon? What an interesting and hypocritical failure to assume good faith; I'm bemused that you claim I'm biased when you're the one self-identifying on your user page as a Venetist. I have absolutely no connection with the movement, its ideologies, with the region or with Italy as a whole as even a cursory glance at my user page would indicate. I rather suggest you spend your energies, as I am, on producing an encyclopaedic article in accordance with the content guidelines than on making ridiculous accusations. ColdmachineTalk 13:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I found your comments here and your warning in my talk page a rather surprising as I did not intend to offend you. However if you were offended by some of my comments, please accept my excuses. I'm happy that we reached a consensus. I always spend my energies in writing encylopedic articles on almost every political party in Italy and in other countries, and I do think that I'm quite objective when I write: in fact I don't support any political party and Venetism is a movement that ecompasses Venetians of every political ideology, so please assume my good faith. I wrote that you were "biased" (and I'm sorry of having used that word) exactly because I'm not sure you know much of the phenomenon we're talking about, as you just said. For instance I'm not sure that the definition of the movement you gave ("a nationalist movement, which encompasses some views on independence but also a whole range of other views ranging from cultural promotion to restoring the old Republic of Venice") is correct and that was what I was referring too. You may be right or maybe not. In my view it is a quite good definition, but I'm not sure it's a neutral one too.
Anyway it is probably a good idea to have all the articles about alike movements with a title under the "XXXXX nationalism" format, even if I'm not against execptions as Pan-arabism is and as "Venetism" could have been. That's why I'm happy that we reached a good compromise on the title and I'm also happy that this article is now the result of the work of different editors. I hope you accept my apologizes and you understand what I intended to say. I'm happy that we settled the issue and that we both can return to work on the issues we like most. Before that, anyway, I will be glad to know your opinion about Southern Italy autonomist movements, a very similar movement to Venetism but with a very different article's title from the one we chose to use here. Any ideas on the title and the scope of the article? --Checco (talk) 16:21, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, no hard feelings and my apologies for jumping to an immediate conclusion about the intent behind your words. It's difficult to communicate in the written word alone, and I understand that English may not be everyone's first, or natural, language. I certainly couldn't present my views in Italian! I'm glad that we reached consensus too: Venetian nationalism is a good name for the article content as it stands. Maybe as the article evolves and other editors come in and adjust the text, the name will no longer be relevant a new consensus will form. Such is the way of Wikipedia. I'll take a look at the article on Southern Italy autonomist movements which you mentioned and join discussions there; thanks for the friendly notice! ColdmachineTalk 21:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Thanks for apologizing me. "Venetian nationalism" is a good compromise title. In fact it is a neologism, as no-one used it before, but I acknowledge that it is a standardized title as "Politics of XXXXX" or "Religion in XXXXX" are. --Checco (talk) 08:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replacement of guillemets with quotation marks

[edit]

See WP:MOSQUOTE (Allowable typographical changes): "In quoting foreign-language text, replace foreign typographical elements such as guillemets (« ») with their English-language equivalents. Replace guillemets with straight quotation marks, and so on." Is that a problem here?

I'm really sorry about that: I didn't know that guillemets are not used in standard English. I will revert my edit. --Checco (talk) 14:28, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! I just came across them when viewing a "Random Page" some months ago and finally got around to changing them (as well as clearing out my bookmarks :-)

POV and contraddictions

[edit]

This article is subtly but clearly not neutral, at least, there are some contraddictions and something is presented in a potentially misleading way.

  1. Section "Achievements": such a section addresses the reader to consider that, what is reported, is the result of actions by some or all nationalist movements. But, actually, not only there's no evidence at all about that, but there are don't even sources which relate the facts reported in that section to the specific venetian nationalism. Even the by-law of Regione Veneto can't be presented as "Achievement", since in each regional by-laws (in Italy) there are initial statements about the specific cultural identity. Presenting these facts as "Achievement" endors the reader to think about a capacity of influence by the venetian nationalism which may be not the reality.
  2. Contraddiction: what is presented as "Achievement" (again, by whom?) in one section, is presented as "inspirating source" in another section. So: is it a result or a starting point?
  3. UNESCO Resolution: UNESCO, by its nature, is a cultural institution and in its statement, it recognizes the cultural value of the local language, stating also that it's still a living language not a risk of extinction. But, in the overall context and in the overall presentation in the article, this Resolution is presented from a political endorsement point of view, as if it was the recognition of a "national identity", which is something rather different. This forces and somehow distorces the actual focus and scope of the UNESCO Resolution. And, once again: was this Resolution actually solicited/promoted by the venetian nationalism or is it just in the normality of UNESCO Resolutions, as the result of a neutral and independent commision of study? This is not evidenced in the article. If it was an independent result by UNESCO itself, then this Resolution has not to be reported as an "Achievement" (unless there are sources demonstrating the opposite), otherwise this is a mere personal interpretation of the writer.

I think that the above needs to be clarified in the article and, moreover, presented in the correct context and scope, otherwise a reader could be led to think about a strong and effective activity of the Venetian Nationalism, while the reality is rather different..... --L736E (talk) 07:42, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear L736E,
Thanks for your interesting thread: you are more than welcome to contribute in order to improve the article. But let me tell you that you probably misunderstand the meaning of "achievement" and the nature of the article itself. The term "nationalism" has been used in en.Wiki to describe all those movements acting with political, economic, cultural, linguistic, etc. goals (in some cases the goal is only cultural, in other cases both political and cultural, and so on) on the basis that what they are defending or promoting is a "nation" (I actually wanted this article to be titled "Venetism", "Venetian autonomism" or "Venetian regionalism", but consensus was for the current title).
  1. "Achievements" section: The article does not state that the listed Venetist goals were achieved by a direct action by Venetists (moreover, who are Venetists? if you read the artcle, you will understand that most Venetian politicians are Venetist to a degree: think of UDC's Stefano Valdegamberi!).
  2. Contradiction: I weren't able to find "inspiring source" in the article, so I don't understand what you're talking about; by the way, Venetist parties and movements are not inspired by the Statute's reference to the "Venetian people": they would definitely believe there is a "Venetian people" even if the Statute were to state otherwise, but, yes, some of them are exploiting that provision in order to promote a referendum on Venetian self-determination or independence.
  3. It is definitely a great achievement for Venetists (and all Venetians, I would add) that Venetian is a "not endangered language" according to UNESCO.
As said, you are more than welcome to improve and expand the article, but please consider my remarks.
--Checco (talk) 08:52, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just a quick answer, supporting Checco's position:
  1. This is subtly but clearly not neutral point of view. Moreover, you demonstrate not to know Italian regional laws which does not show such support to "localism", out of a few regions (like Veneto, Sardinia).
  2. As Checco wrote.
  3. As above, subtly but clearly not neutral. Actually UNESCO is a cultural institution: but, when talking about UN or states, what is the difference between culture and politics? Often, culture is politics! Indeed it is, in Italy, where there are many difficulties to achieve the result of seeing recognised a minority language, even if "protected" by UNESCO as in this case.
  4. Venetism was in the end able to bring the Regional Council to declare that a self-determination referendum must be held (already voted, with positive result), followed by a law proposal to effectively organise it in the next fall (still to be voted): it seems to me, neutrally talking, a strong and effective activity. Once again, your point of view is subtly but clearly not neutral: you seem to be willing to hide this page, rather to improve it.
Filippo83 (talk) 08:46, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Filippo83 for his contribution. I thus removed the tag L736E inserted, but I also did my best to improve the article following L736E's observations (and, while I was at it, I also improved/expanded some sections which needed clean-up or were, in my view, inadequate). --Checco (talk) 09:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

POV

[edit]

New pov has been added in the last days: the online referendum has been strongly contested by the few sources/observers who didn't ignore it, basically it has been showed how voters exceeded of ~30% the average number of Internet users in Veneto and how some "fictional characters" were able to vote! --Vituzzu (talk) 14:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article clearly explains that the referendum was not official and that the results are those announced by the referendum's promoters. The article, as every article, can be expanded and improved. I count on your help. --Checco (talk) 11:52, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I must recall WP:BALANCE, most of external observer didn't took it seriously. --Vituzzu (talk) 13:04, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to remove the tag. If there are specific things to be improved/sourced, let me know. --Checco (talk) 08:38, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Venetian nationalism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:16, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the separatist party with 60 % of votes in Veneto ?

[edit]

The Northern league has never been a "pure" separatist party and even less nowadays, so it is hard to state that the people who voted the Northern league want the independence of Veneto. If all the opinion polls say that 50/60% of people from Veneto want the independence from Italy why the real separatist parties in Veneto struggle to arrive at 5/6% ? Maybe this wiki (as well as that one of Veneto) page has been written mainly by venetian nationalist ? Magnagr (talk) 01:24, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are perfectly right that neither Lega Nord nor Liga Veneta are unambiguously separatist. Veneto is indeed a strange case. While in Scotland, Flanders and Catalonia the support for separatist parties is higher than that for independence, in Veneto it is the other way around. --Checco (talk) 07:24, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Checco for the quick reply but I cannot fully understand the difference between a party supporting separatism and another promoting the independence of a Region.Magnagr (talk) 21:17, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There is no difference (separatism=independentism). What is interesting about Veneto is that, even if a majority of the voters are in favour of independence according to opinion polls, separatist and mildly separatist parties obtain only a minority of the regional vote. --Checco (talk) 10:15, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Venetian nationalism. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:47, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural issues

[edit]

Hello! User:Nick O'Demy wrote the following message in my talk page. I copy it here, as it is of general interest. Unfortunately, he wrote in Italian.

Ciao Checco, ho visto che hai modificato la pagina sul Regionalismo veneto riaggiungendo la parte secondo cui questo promuoverebbe la riscoperta di cultura e tradizioni venete ed ho pensato di dirti come mai, a parer mio, questa sia poco appropriata: Il venetismo, nella sostanza, è un movimento politico che vuole una maggiore indipendenza del Veneto dall'Italia; per cui nel parlare di "riscoperta della cultura veneta" mi sembra che ne si faccia una narrazione un po' romanzata e, francamente, poco oggettiva. La ragione per cui rimuoverei quella parte, quindi, è che nel leggerla potrebbe sembrare che chi non concorda con le tesi del regionalismo veneto voglia sopprimerne la cultura e le tradizioni o comunque non dia a queste particolare importanza, cosa che invece credo possiamo concordare sia falsa. Al di là delle nostre fedi politiche quindi, che possono tranquillamente discordare, non credi che quella frase sul venetismo sia quantomeno fuorviante? Nick O'Demy (talk) 23:26, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Venetian nationalism emerged in the Sixties and the Seventies primarily as a cultural movement, for instance through the Venetian Philological Society. That "Venetists [also] promote the rediscovery of the Republic of Venice's heritage, traditions, culture, and language" is not deceptive or controversial at all. I simply do not understand your point. You are more than welcome to explain it here, in English. --Checco (talk) 16:02, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Venetian_nationalism&oldid=1210093990"