Talk:Venice/Archive 1

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

Motto of Venice

I just came across this page -- it is excellent.

However, what I was looking for (an incription on a statute of a lion holding a book) was not included. I did find this on another web page and think that it would be useful to add to this web page.

Best wishes,

John Reindl October 31, 2009

The motto of Venice (Pax – Evan, Tibi – Geli, Mar – Sta, Ce – Meus) is the traditional shortened version of the Latin phrase “Pax tibi, Marce, Evangelista meus. Hic requiescet corpus tuum,” which translates to “Peace to you, Mark, my Evangelist. Here your body shall rest.” According to Venetian tradition, the blessing was spoken by an angel to Saint Mark during his visit to Venice and justified the Venetian theft of the Saint’s body from Alexandria. The image of the Lion with an inscribed book has appeared in countless locations throughout Venice over the past millennium and is the emblem and landmark of Venice.

Reference: http://95.110.194.207/CatalogoRenaissance/catalogo/renaissance/pdf/low/eng/LOT%2032.pdf, accessed October 31, 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.135.73.110 (talk) 23:34, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

"Acquisition of the relics of St. Mark the Evangelist"

"In 828, the new city's prestige was raised by the acquisition of the claimed relics of St. Mark the Evangelist from Alexandria, which were placed in the new basilica."

Could you please be more precise with the verb "acquisition": was it a purchase or a robbery or something else? These relics are very important to the city and tourists so I believe this information should be more specific. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.109.123.11 (talk) 14:44, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Venice in Veneto

According to Venice page in Veneto, it says Venice is Venesia in Veneto language. However, here in English page, it is written as Venexia, in French page, it's Veneszia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aquablue5 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Services

I am curious how services like water, sewerage, electricity, fire fighting and ambulances are provided in Venice. All of these things that many take for granted must present a particular challenge in a city where many of the "streets" are waterways. I think it would make a useful addition to the article if someone has access to that information. Silverchemist (talk) 18:13, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Geminated t?

The article currently claims that Venezia is pronounced [veˈnɛttsja], but I do not hear the geminated t. Come to that, I also don't really agree with the j, and I'm not convinced the two e's are different. I admit I'm not a native speaker. Where does this pronunciation come from? --Trovatore (talk) 21:06, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not a native speaker either, but I have removed the geminated t, for the simple reason that Italian writing is very close to Standard Italian pronunciation, so when they want to geminate sounds, they actually geminate them. As ts is z, tts would be zz of course, well known in the non-English-pronounced pizza; but never a single z. I didn't hear the geminated t in the audio example, either.--2001:A61:20D6:BA01:5DFE:7093:86E4:B74 (talk) 11:55, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Commune??

The word "commune" has a completely-different meaning in American and Canadian English - and probably in British English, too.
The word "commune" is grossly misused in this article.
We see problems like this often in articles that were written by Continental Europeans who do not have a good grasp on English. We see it also in words like "metropolis". In real English, a "metropolis" is a big urban area like London, Manchester, New York City, Los Angeles, Tokyo, Rio de Janiero, Sydney, and Bangkok. A metropolis is not a farming village somewhere. A farming village somewhere, or some similar place, might be a commune.98.67.106.90 (talk) 04:15, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Resources

There needs to be an section about resources.96.254.152.101 (talk) 14:29, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Jews lived under better conditions?

"Napoleon was seen as something of a liberator by the city's Jewish population, although it can be argued they had lived with fewer restrictions in Venice" Source? What arguments? Why? 108.29.193.124 (talk) 18:28, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Name(s) pronunciation

If I understand correctly, the article maintains that the form Venexia is pronunced [veˈnɛsja] with a voiceless sibilant. Actually, while /veˈnɛsja/ is the current spoken form of the name, the written form Venexia contained the voiceD sibilant X (the same as Eng. xylophone and today's Ven. xe) and thus most probably corresponded to an older pronunciation /veˈnɛzja/. This is also confirmed by its old Italian rendering Vinegia (with voiced g), which is completely parallel to the venetian word xogàtolo/zogàtolo that has been rendered as Giocattolo in Italian. As a matter of fact, near the older written form Venexia, which some people are reviving today, also a newer written form Venesia exists (with It. orthography Venessia), which renders the moder voiceless sibilant. All in all: old written form Venexia corresponds to old voiced pronunciation /veˈnɛzja/; written form Venesia corresponds to the current spoken form [veˈnɛsja]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.95.207.85 (talk) 17:37, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Still very unbalanced

As I pointed out already in 2010, this article is heavily biased and not helpful for readers. Nothing has changed, so I'm adding a POV tag. The problem is this.

  • For most of history, "Venice" meant the famous city in the lagoon, build on several islands connected by bridges and canals.
  • While the historic Venice, the city in the lagoon, was one of the larger in Europe, the same area today is barely a small town, it's population well below 60.000 and continuning to decrease.
  • To give the impression that "Venice", is still a city of considerable size, mainland areas such as Mestre and Marghera have been merged with historic Venice to create the modern Venice with almost 300.000 people, but almost all of whom live on the mainland in Mestre and Marghera, not in the historic city of Venice.
  • This article deals almost exclusively with "Venice on the islands" and mainly uses Mestre and Marghera to bolster the population from a small provincial town to a relatively large Italian city. This is confusing for the reader.

To deal with this, there are several possible solutions, all of which would give a less tilted impression.

  1. We reduce this article about the modern commune of Venice to deal only with the modern commune, and then redirect people to Mestre, Marghera and Venice to deal with the three cities making up the modern commune.
  2. We rewrite the current article to give proper weight to Mestre, Marghera. In the history section, it makes sense to focus on the city on the islands, but all the other sections of the article should focus to 75% on the mainland, and most of the pictures should be from the mainland parts of Venice. This is not a tourist ad, we should not big the most beautiful pictures but the most representative.

My preferred option would be the first, as I think that the modern commune deserves an article, and just like there are separate articles already on Mestre, Marghera, even though they are part of the modern commune, there should be an article on the modern town on the islands (what most people think of as Venice) instead of this current mix that only confuses readers. Jeppiz (talk) 12:07, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@Jeppiz: Centro Storico is referred to by the majority of English WP:Reliable sources as Venice, and per WP:Commonname this article should be exclusively about the historic city in the lagoon. The municipality Comune di Venezia would have a separate article of its own. Firebrace (talk) 18:21, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
The historic center of a city is almost always most representative of it.--2001:A61:20D6:BA01:5DFE:7093:86E4:B74 (talk) 11:57, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

JMW Turner

Why no mention of Turner's works? his Venice paintings are celebrated.

Commune/Municipality

Is there any reason for the usage of the word *commune* in the article? It seems to be used as a translation of the Italian word *comune* (with only one m!), but the correct translation for that is, to the best of my knowledge, *municipality*. If there are no objections in the next 24h I will change all instances of the word *commune* to *municipality* DenisNardin (talk) 23:14, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Geography

Under the geography section, I added information regarding characteristics of the parishes in the city. There is very minimal information about these parishes in Wikipedia, I added updates. “Each parish exhibited unique characteristics but also belonged to an integrated network. The community chose its own patron saint, staged its own festivals, congregated around its own market center, constructed its own bell towers and developed its own customs.” Awisbar (talk) 21:24, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Economy

Under Economy, I added the reason why shipbuilding is done mainly in Mestre and Marghera. “Since World War II many Venetians have moved to Mestre and Marghera seeking employment as well as affordable housing.” Awisbar (talk) 21:25, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Chapter 2.1 "Origins"

in paragraph 3 the etymology of "doge" is explained. in paragraph 4 it is explained all over again.--dunnhaupt (talk) 20:26, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Demographics - why 2009???

The lead provides 2014 population data but the Demographic section is stuck in 2009, with one fact about 2016. How can that make sense??

Why has this never been updated?? Peter K Burian (talk) 13:16, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

The Tourism section was out of date too. There has been so much media coverage - in the major European newspapers - of the problems (2016 and 2017) caused by too many visitors (especially day trippers from cruise ships) that it's surprising how little this article included. I have updated it without including any comments from lobby groups in order to maintain a Neutral Point of View. Peter K Burian (talk) 13:47, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, Neutrality is in Doubt!

This city has so many problems. And yet, much of the article ignores them or glosses over them. I have revised the Tourism section and will do some work on the Economy as well.

e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/02/when-will-venice-sink-google ... Venice’s financial situation is dire: the town hall has a shortfall of tens of millions of euros in its operating budget, and its debts exceed €400m. In effect, the place is bankrupt. ... the churches and palazzi should continue to stand for many more decades. Long before the water overwhelms Venice, however, it could die of tourism. As short-stay rentals push the cost of living in Venice higher with every passing year, the native population is being driven out. Venice is becoming a ghost-city, a high-culture holiday resort. It’s in that sense that it’s really sinking – and fast.

The Neutrality is fine now, remove POV label

I believe we can remove this label now. I moderated the hype about Venice and added info about their many challenges so it no longer reads like PR Hype.

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (March 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) Peter K Burian (talk) 14:42, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Sooo....

I'm assuming that this city and Annecy, France have something in common. They are both similar to the canal village of Yahrboot, Georgia, United States. Gigi Hadide (talk) 06:33, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Amazing omissions

In looking for something I came here, found nothing, then happened to come across Ottoman–Venetian War (1570–1573). How can this not be mentioned or even linked in this article? I mean, what, let's talk about glass blowing instead? Shenme (talk) 06:00, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

A single article can only go into so much depth: if one wants more history one looks for the Main article link, History of the Republic of Venice, just as the reader interested in glass goes on to Venetian glass (the #History section really should use Template:Main instead of Template:See also). I did go ahead and link Ottoman-Venetian wars in #Decline. Sparafucil (talk) 20:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
Thank you Sparafucil. I think it was searching for in-page mentions of 'ottoman' that amazed me most - only three. I somehow missed the links, under the #History section header, to History of the Republic of Venice and Timeline of the Republic of Venice. 'History' mentions the Ottomans 18 times, while 'Timeline' mentions them not at all (!). It is a strange overlooking, that. Thank you again. Shenme (talk) 21:07, 4 September 2018 (UTC)== External links modified ==

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Venice. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 16:21, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Venice. 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, 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 21:44, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Venice. 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, 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 11:58, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Venice. 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 to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 21:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Act of vandalism

I have spoted the following sentence ˝Connections with the Latin verb 'venire' (to come) or (Slo)venia are fanciful.˝ This (Slo) doesnt belong here so I think it`s vandalism so it should be removed. If anyone disaggres with me plese explain me what the hell does it mean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.72.117.79 (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

The Doges

It's funny how this article equates doges with dukes, when the article on doges specifically says they are not the same. Since I don't know which is which, I won't change anything. Anyone ?204.44.0.4 (talk) 19:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Tide and Life Section - Readibility, Style and Content

The following paragraph needs considerable work:

Tide and Life in Venice
Sometimes the Tide reachs levels which causes difficulties for the residents. With very high tide the sea water floods sidewalks and ground floor of buildings, and boats do not pass under the bridge (blocking of public transport, etc.) With very low tide, motorboats can not move (public transport, ambulance, firemen vehicles, taxi, etc.). For this, the Tide Forecast in Venice has an office that plays an important role, because the accuracy of prediction is very important. Today anyone can see the tide forecast in web site of Venice City Hall.
Numerous typographical, grammatical and readibility issues exist in this single section alone. I would rewrite it but the entire article seems to be under review, so I figured it better to leave it to those of you actively maintaining the page. 94.169.109.112 (talk) 18:08, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
I agree that the above section, as quoted here, is a mess of poor English.98.67.106.90 (talk) 03:55, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

LANGUAGES

the section titled language gives a lot of confusion. venice , like milan , genova... is italophone and all the population speaks italian as native language. however , apart from italian, the majority of the population ( like in milan ) speaks venetian as its dialect. it is different from bolzano, where there are two distinct linguistic groups. i am from venice. |}== About # 1.5 Modern age "After 1,070 years ..." ==

After 1,070 years, the Republic lost independence when Napoleon Bonaparte on 12 May 1797, conquered Venice during the First Coalition. ... (Under #1.5 Modern Age")

I have doubt on this "1070 years". I don't see anything mentioned in the article about the event happened 1070 years before 1797CE, which is 727 CE. The sentence neither seems suggesting after "the year 1070", or "the 1070s". I've checked the Italian Version which the similar paragraph says

Nel XVIII secolo Venezia fu tra le città più raffinate d'Europa, con una forte influenza sull'arte, l'architettura e la letteratura del tempo, ma questo non era che un segno del suo inesorabile tramonto. Dopo oltre 1000 anni d'indipendenza, il 12 maggio 1797 il doge Ludovico Manin e il Maggior Consiglio vennero costretti da Napoleone ad abdicare, per proclamare il "Governo Provvisorio della Municipalità di Venezia".

Although I do not understand Italian, Internet translator says

In the eighteenth century Venice was one of the finest cities in Europe, with a strong influence on art, architecture and literature of the time, but this was not a sign of his relentless sun. After more than 1000 years of independence, May 12, 1797, the Doge Ludovico Manin and the Great Council were forced Napoleon to abdicate, to proclaim the "Provisional Government of the Municipality of Venice."

It seems that the 1070 here should be corrected into "After 1100 years,", which suggests Venice gained independence in 697 CE.

Any responses?--Cnchina (talk) 09:38, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I've checked through the revision history of Venice in both English version and Italian Version. Surprisingly this error has been passed on for such a long time since 27 October 2001 by User:Tsja with edition summary of "date surrender to Napoleon", while the Italian Version started to have the text 1070 only since 3 gen 2004 by Pietro "storia(history)".

Tsja's edition says

It was an independent city state for 1070 years until conquered by Napoleon Bonaparte on May 12, 1797.

it was an expansion from the previous version

It was an independent city state until conquered by Napoleon Bonaparte.

Apparently neither text came with reference, thus I would question this time duration of 1070 years strongly, and I change it into 1100 years. --Cnchina (talk) 10:38, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Venice Boats replace vans and cars 2008.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Venice Boats replace vans and cars 2008.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:28, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

After the great water balloon fight on 1453?

The following sentence, in the second paragraph really doesn't make sense. "After the great water balloon fight on 1453 also known as il aqua balonio vinice was completely drenched in water, thanks to the french ambassidor who took the water back with him to france the city was able to thrive with boat production and production of nice knives." Can someone clarify it's meaning or source? Nkatz22 (talk) 22:35, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Describing Venice

I have just intervened with the ridiculous understatement of the first sentence.

Venice is a city in northern Italy known for its tourism and its industry.

No. Most definitely not the right way to describe Venice.

  • "Venice is a city in northern Italy renowned for the beauty of its natural setting, its architecture and its artworks."

This is what Venice is known (renowned) for.

  • Now, I know that there are people out there in Wiki who know the MOS backwards and will jump up and down and say "You can't say it's beautiful,
I am not saying that it is beautiful. There is no value judgement involved in this. I am stating that it is renowned for its beauty ie. people think it is beautiful, believe it to be beautiful, perceive it as beautiful and visit because of that opinion.
It is the renown of this beauty that makes Venice famous, not tourism and industry. Tourism is the result, not a factor in itself. Tourism doesn't describe Venice, any more than it describes London or Bangkok or Las Vegas.
  • The Wikipedia Manual of Style cautions against the use of "Peacock words" such as "famous", "important", and "beautiful", "influential" and "unique". This is necessary, because otherwise every person who writes about a film star, a painting or a place would describe it as "beautiful", and everyone who writes about a notable person would describe them as "famous". And everyone who writes about anything at all out of the usual would describe it as "unique".
But this does not mean that the words cannot be used, with appropriate reference.
eg. "In Mythology, Helen of Troy was regarded as the most beautiful woman in the world."
"The Ceiling of the Sistine Chapel was the most influential work of art of the High Renaissance"
"The fame of the sculptor Phidias made him an almost legendary figure."
"La Sagrada Familia is unique among the world's churches for its architectural style"
In each one of these cases understanding the beauty, the fame, the uniqueness or the extraordinary degree of influence that the subject had, is essential to understanding the subject itself. If you don't say that Helen of Troy was the most beautiful woman on earth, then you don't fully understand the legend. If you don't know that Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel Ceiling changed the face of painting forever, then you don't understand its significance. If you are not told that Sagrada Familia is "unique", then you might not put it on your bucket list.
  • Here are some more "one offs" in the world, that need to be treated as such:
  1. The Taj Mahal
  2. Leonardo da Vinci
  3. St Peter's Basilica
  4. Mecca
  5. Elvis Presley
In the case of each of these subjects, there is nothing else that equals their unique quality, their position in the world, or the enormous fame that they have.
In each one of these cases, the amount of fame that they generate or the unique position that they hold in human consciousness goes far beyond that which is merely "notable enough for an article on Wikipedia".
Venice falls into this category.
Venice is not "just another city".
Venice is absolutely unique for the combination of things that it represents. It is unique in a way that London and Paris and Barcelona and New York and even Rome are not.
So the first line of that description must say far far more than "known for its tourism and industry". So is Wollongong. So is Blackpool. So is Manila.
  • The point is that the Wiki policy is meant to contain the use of such words as "beautiful" and "famous" for those occasions when it is actually appropriate to use them.
Writing about "Venice" is one of those occasions.

Amandajm (talk) 02:50, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Comment I agree with the sentiment that Venice is known for more than just tourism even if it is becoming the world most expensive theme park, but I don't think I would have ever used the phrase "beautiful natural setting" to describe Venice. Venice is certainly extraordinary for the canal setting but it is hardly natural. I think your word unique is more appropriate, but somehow misses the mark in that it is the architecture in that particular setting that creates the mood that is uniquely Venice. Saffron Blaze (talk) 10:12, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
I agree. I removed the word "natural". The "setting" is part of Venice, natural or not. The light, the reflections the mist etc. Amandajm (talk) 10:19, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Nickname

The Serenissima — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.148.130.241 (talk) 13:06, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Wood for piles

In English Wikipedia (Venice):Wood for piles was cut in the most western part of today's Slovenia, resulting in the barren land in a region today called Kras, in two regions of Croatia, Lika and Gorski kotar (resulting in the barren slopes of Velebit) and south of Montenegro. What are the sources of this info?

In Russian Wikipedia (Венеция): Венеция построена на сваях из российской лиственницы (Venice is built on piles of Russian larch) (source: http://en.civilg8.ru/priority/energy/2054.php) . --Владимир Шеляпин (talk) 07:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

The mention of "barren land" in Kras as a result of building Venice is in conflict with the Wikipedia articla on Kras, which says: "Although much of the wood for the closely spaced piles that support the island city of Venice, Italy came from this region, Venice carefully managed the Karst forests as a reserve for naval timber. The most radical deforestation occurred in the mid-nineteenth century due to clear-cutting by local farmers and conversion of the land into pastures for sheep". So, which one is it? 85.218.29.220 (talk) 17:27, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Wood does not turn to stone when underwater for long periods of time. the following extract describes what happens. In all wood, after long periods in wet soil, peat bogs, and marine sites, bacterial action causes a degradation of cell wall components. In general, water-soluble substances, such as starch and sugar, are the first to be leached from waterlogged wood, along with mineral salts, coloring agents, tanning matters, and other bonding materials. In time, through hydrolysis, cellulose in the cell walls disintegrates, leaving only a lignin network to support the wood. Even the lignin will break down over a long period of time. As a result of the disintegration of cellulose and lignin, spaces between the cells and molecules increase, and the wood becomes more porous and permeable to water. All of the deteriorated elements of the wood, including all cell cavities and intermolecular spaces, are filled with water. The remaining lignin structure of wood cells and the absorbed water preserves the shape of the wood. The loss of the finer cellulose tissue does not cause much alteration in the gross volume of wood, but the porosity is increased, and the wood absorbs water like a sponge. A waterlogged wooden object will retain its shape as long as it is kept wet. If the wood is exposed to air, the excess water evaporates, and the resulting surface tension forces of the evaporating water cause the weakened cell walls to collapse, creating considerable shrinkage and distortion.[1]

Under the section "Foundations" I am deleting the second sentence of this paragraph: "Submerged by water, in oxygen-poor conditions, wood does not decay as rapidly as on the surface. It is petrified as a result of the constant flow of mineral-rich water around and through it, so that it becomes a stonelike structure." It is not true. Petrification is a process of fossilization that takes many thousands of years.
As a side note, in Boston, Mass., which has a lot of similar construction, as a result of preventing sea water from repeatedly flowing into the old sewer tunnels for reasons of sanitation, thereby lowering the water table under the city, old wood piles have been exposed to oxygen and are rotting away, causing damage to the buildings above. Huw Powell (talk) 23:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
I agree about the wood. It takes hundreds of thousands of years for wood - or nearly anything else - to fossilize or petrify. The idea that there is petrified wood underneath Venice is ludicrous.98.67.106.90 (talk) 04:02, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

German elink relevant?

I have no intention of edit warring about an elink I cannot read in an article that I don't edit other than by accident, but regarding this, I don't see how a non-English, German article is of relevance as an elink (not even a ref). Could somebody explain it, and in particular, how is it better than English links? I'd understand if we linked to some Italian websites here, but German...? If there was a good Chinese or Polish portal of Venice, we would include them here, too? They belong on German, Chinese, or Polish Wikipedias, not here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:22, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I had Google translate the article and despite the rather literal aspect of the translation it is a very good source of information on Venice, particulary the history. Ideally it could be reworded and paraphased to a degree and actually inputted into the English article then used as the source. Until then I would not be too concerned about it remaining as an e-link. As an aside, from what I gather the author of the work is/was a Wikipedia editor. Saffron Blaze (talk) 18:49, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Very unbalanced

The city of Venice, the subject of this article, consists of a few frazioni, including: Centro Storico, Mestre and Marghera. This article deals exclusively with one frazione, Centro Storico, and uses Mestre and Marghera only to inflate the number of inhabitants. I'm the first to admit that Centro Storico has the most interesting history by miles, not to mention the vast majority of sights. However, that's still not a reason to focus exclusively on Centro Storico. Given that the vast majority of inhabitants in the city live in other frazioni, there's no reason why the sections on transportation, on culture, on geography and on economy should focus exclusively on only this frazione. At times the article even contradicts itself, saying things such as "The city is divided into six areas or "sestiere", thereby implying that the city is only the Centro Storico. The article needs a complete rewrite, not just a few inserted sentences about other frazioni. Alternatively, we could have a separate article on the centro storico, just like we have articles on Mestre and Marghera. What we should not have is a confusing mix between the whole city and only the centro storico. Unfortunately, that confusing mix is precisely what this article is at the moment, taking a POV that treats Venice as nothing else than the centro storico.Jeppiz (talk) 10:08, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

18th Century naval activities:

The Venetian navy was both active and highly effective throughout the 18th century and the Arsenal of Veniice was the envy of ALL the naval powers of Europe. Venice was the only mercantile power in the Mediterranian which refused to pay off the North African pirates. Instead, VENICE USED FORCE until the North African pirates returned ships, crews, AND cargos. Venice also siezed moneys to pay for their expeditions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.92.4.183 (talk) 04:02, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Europe and North America?

Under the heading UNESCO World Heritage Site the region is Europe and North America, can someone explain to me why that would be the case. What has Venice got to do with North America? FFMG (talk) 11:43, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

They are both in the Western world. The article, World Heritage Site, gives a brief background to it. SilkTork *YES! 23:16, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

118 or 18 islands?

Intro: "The city stretches across 118 small islands ..."

Transportation: "It is built on an archipelago of 18 islands ..."

Which is it?

By the way, does this statement from the Transportation section, "transportation within the city remains, as it was in centuries past, entirely on water or on foot.", apply just to the old center, or to the entire city of Venice? --Born2cycle (talk) 23:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

It's 118 islands, fixed. The bit about only foot and water transport is true of the entire city, barring some areas near where the bridge arrives. Being an island, Venice doesn't have a well-defined old center in any case. blahaccountblah (talk) 04:18, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

"It is considered by many to be..."

"It is considered by many to be one of the most beautiful cities in the world" - Who is many? One source does not justify this claim. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and while I agree that venice is one of the most beautiful cities others may not.

I've tagged it with a {{who}} tag for now. Perhaps a better idea would be to replace this sentence with a mention of any awards the city has won for it's beauty or something like that.

Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign!) 14:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to change it to "It is often cited as...". The citation in place now should cover that.Terminal157 (talk) 16:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Panoramas

I just got back from a trip to Venice and noticed a panorama being used on the page that is very similar to one I took. My version has a wider view from the same tower, so I've uploaded it to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Venice_pano1.jpg and thought it might be useful. Dgt84 (talk) 22:13, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Looks good. I placed it as the new panorama image. El Greco(talk) 00:42, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Heresy in Venice

Actually the Venetians did enacted executions for religious heresy during the Counter-Reformation, but these executions were only done in secret, because enacting the executions in Public would sent the wrong message to the Venetians trading Partners. for more information see this program about the counter reformation and inquisition in Italy.La convivencia (talk) 20:53, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

[[1]]

Master alarm

Reportedly water is 108 centimeters over scale zero right now, may be the worst acqua alta since 1996 and one can only hope events of 1966 will not repeat. 91.83.4.11 (talk) 23:27, 1 November 2008 (UTC)


Historical ages mix-up

> The Venetian Republic was a major maritime power during the Middle Ages and Renaissance <

This sentence from the article is faulty. It should be "The Venetian Republic was a major maritime power during the Middle Ages, INCLUDING the Renaissance".

The medieval ages are categorized to last from 476AD to 1640AD (from final fall of imperial Rome to the english revolution). Then comes modern age, with some left-wing historians establishing a "most modern" age from 1917 to now on (marking the creation of red Russia plus the US intervention in WWI establishing the US world dominance, events paving way for a bilateral global confrontation).

Anyhow, the renaissance era firmly ended by year 1640, therefore it is part of the medieval ages. Medieval ages ended not because of advances in liberal arts and humanities (the renaissance) but because of "natural subjects" advances in navigation and trade (the Americas), science (Newton) and manufacture (textile, iron, steam). 91.83.21.86 (talk) 22:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Primary Photo

Venice is probably the most beautiful city in the world yet the picture chosen as the primary photograph on this article is incredibly poor. There are so many fine pictures showing far more detail available. This picture should be replaced by something showing a close-up of Piazza San Marco and the bell tower (taken from the water). I'd upload my own photo of this but Wikipedia has far too strict and stupid rules for adding photographs. Why all this worrying about licenses shit for photographs? Just let people upload whatever they wish and only delete IF the original owner complains. Wikimedia needs to move its servers to a country which has data protection laws which favour citizens rather than laws which only protect big business like in the USA.--217.202.117.38 (talk) 19:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Polluted Water

Isn't Venice notorious for its polluted water? Gregory E. Miller (talk) 21:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC))

Septic tanks are now being installed in houses to prevent shit going into the water (previously the city relied solely on the daily tide cycle for hygiene...) The use of phosphate based artifical fertilizers have been banned in surrounding agricultural fields to prevent the water becoming green. The smell of rot is evident during the summer, when water is low and disintegrating plant remains contact the air. It is generally recommended not to immerse any body part in venetians canals or lagoons! After acqua alta, do not jump into the remaining puddles barefoot. Locals don't even drink the tapwater, which is piped in from the mainland, they always buy bottled from shops. 91.83.4.11 (talk) 18:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Some local Venetians do drink the tap water. While the rate of consumption of bottled water is high compared to the rest of the world, all of Italy has a high rate of consuming bottled water, so Venice is not unique in that respect. Blahaccountblah (talk) 03:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Very little info present.

There should be a seperate article on venetian architecture and infrastructure. E.g. how do they build stone palaces on top of a grid of wooden piles or how do they feed drinking water pipes and electric cables to houses that stand in deep water or how do they collect and remove sewage and bodily waste? There should be illsutration, like exploded view drawings, maps, etc. 91.83.1.22 (talk) 21:02, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Lenght

the section Famous Venetians, Written works referencing Venice, Visual works referencing Venice, and all the lists should be moved into a separated article or articles. it makes the article unnecessarily long and is not interesting for most readers. --Lykantrop (Talk) 12:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


Photos

Is it just me, or are there too many similar photos of gondolas on this page? Dave1986 (talk) 12:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Text referring to adult activities being conducted on gondola's was removed. 209.114.238.22 (talk) 15:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

politics, government, economy, demographics, education, etc. . .

Where the hell is all this stuff? The article discusses all this long in the past, but what of stuff after 1950? 06:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Venice

Venice is so beautiful! More images about St. Marco should appear on the main page. Il Pazzo 16:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

title

Why has ", Italy" been added to the title? This is *the* Venice. The "comma-country" form may be common in the US, but it doesn't seem appropriate elsewhere. --Joy [shallot] 13:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

When a majority of voters in the USA are dumb enough to elect a man like George W Bush as president I can actually see the need to add this kind of information. Maybe we should also say that "Venice is comparable in size to Washington DC" or that "Italy is a country in Europe" like half of the US media websites do. --217.202.117.38 (talk) 19:48, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Editing needed

about halfway down the page, under the subtitle of Main Sights: VILLA BARBARO could someone fix the text(and maybe remove the box) that runs out the length of the entire page(and then some)?


("Villa Barbaro in Maser (Treviso) was designed by Palladio and frescoed by Veronese. It was built for Daniele Barbaro, Patriarch of Aquila and his brother Sant’Antonio Barbaro, a diplomatic. The costruction began in 1549 and ended in 1558. The villa first descended thorough female lines in the same family until 1938.") DebCh 14:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)DebCh

English

Someone who both speaks English as a mother tongue and is well acquainted with Venice desperately needs to proof-read this article. There are certain sentences that are incomprehensible. To a great extent this is because it's not correct English. I'd love to correct the article, but there are enough sentences where I can only guess at the intended meaning. I don't want to change something so that it's completely wrong. The biggest problems: there are too many long sentences that do not read naturally and the grammar is sometimes completely incorrect (especially prepositions and some verbs).Steevm 02:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Sewage

No mention whatever is made in the current article regarding one important fact about this city that for marketing reasons is hardly ever mentioned in tourist guides and brochures: its "romantic" canals also serve as the city's foul-smelling sewers. This recent study by Rick Gersberg, a San Diego State University scholar, reveals the unhealthily polluted condition of the canals: "Because Venice is made up of several small islands, there is no sewage system; they just dump their raw sewage right into the canals," Gersberg said. "Normally, the tides come in and flush everything out. But when you cut off the tide, it just sits there." [...] A total of 17 water samples were collected over three consecutive summers and processed to determine contamination levels. According to results, 78 percent of the Venice lagoon canals tested positive for both hepatitis A viruses and enteroviruses, which cause common gastro-intestinal illnesses. At Venice's beach island of Lido, a popular Italian swimming spot separating the Venice lagoon from the Adriatic Sea, hepatitis A wasn't detected, but enteroviruses were found in all samples. [...] "Right now, pollution in the Venice canals is below European health standards, and pollution at Lido beach is just near the acceptable level," said Gersberg. I think this information is very relevant and should be included in the article. Uaxuctum 18:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC) Mentioned it in Wikitravel Guide about Venice - Section "Stay safe & healty". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.25.62.90 (talk) 18:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Order of entries in lists

The lists of books and movies do not seem to be in any clear order. Consider ordering the lists: chronological, alpha by title, or alpha by author (for books). Same with the list of Venetians: chronological by birth (or presumed birth) or alpha by last name.

map of location of Venice relative to Italy

There should be a map showing where Venice is located within Italy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.137.156.197 (talk) 09:38, 23 December 2006 (UTC).

What?

In the first paragraph, it says: This city is said to be the most beautiful in the world. ...I don't think that's supposed to be there.

Well it is beautiful —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.19.115.125 (talk) 23:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Wood

I'm pretty sure that wood will eventually decay underwater despite the lack of oxygen (do to what we in the biz call anaerobic bacteria) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ministry of truth 02 (talk • contribs) 19:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

I heard it's become/becoming petrified! I've seen and held a sample of petrified wood from somewhere, and it's amazing! It's actually turned to stone! So if that's the case with the wooden supports, then they won't rot. Stone doesn't rot! Anyone else have anything to add?

And by the way, there is plenty of oxygen in the water, otherwise, how would fish breathe !? --DaveDodgy (talk) 15:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Venetian Glass

I was astonished to find out that this article does not mention the craft Glassblowing at all. To me, glassblowing is almost synonymous with Venice, and the article Glassblowing only mentions Venice very briefly:

Venice, particularly the island of Murano, became a centre for high quality glass manufacture in the late medieval period.

Sadly, I feel I can't contribute myself due to lack of knowledge, so I call upon others to address the matter. My regards, --Dna-Dennis talk - contribs 09:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I just found an article with more info here: Venetian glass. Regards, --Dna-Dennis talk - contribs 09:58, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

the link to my site keeps getting deleted

What is the problem Mushroom? I've checked the Guidelines and I qualify, especially as a 'unique resource' and information not contained on the Wikipedia, I think, and I'm in none of the proscribed categories. The many people who come to my site from other Wiki pages each week presumably agree, as do the many people who click through from the Venice page when you haven't deleted my link, again. I thought that we committed not-for-profit information providers were in this together.

jeffc@fictionalcities.co.uk

Delete. This link does not qualify for an encyclopedic entry about Venice. It doesn't extend or expand on information in the article; instead it's about fictional novels set in a fictional Venice. What's that got to do with anything here? Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle to drive traffic to your site or enhance your search engine rankings. Also, do not presume to know the minds of "the many people who click through" — if anything, they (like me) clicked through because they wondered "why is this link here?" and decided the link isn't relevant to the article. -Amatulic 00:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
A small-beer website owner replies
Your attitude boggles my mind, as does your picking on my small link when there's so much else you could be doing adding to the knowledge base rather than limiting it, and improving the rest of the Venice page. And by the way the novels on my site are set in the real Venice, as are the non-fiction books, as are the films and graphic novels set in the real place. I assume your use of the phrase 'fictional Venice' is derived from my site introduction, which seems to be as far as you got - I'm being, you know, poetic or creative or whatever you might like to call it by introducing the concept of a Venice of the mind being made up of fiction and reality. Anyway I'm wasting my time, I think. I can see that the principles of the internet are in safe hands here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Palazzo (talk • contribs)
Regarding improving things: The contributions from User:Palazzo consist almost entirely of linkspam promoting his web site. -Amatulic 16:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
A small-beer website owner gives up
My 'contribution' is my website, which takes up my time and this is your empire, it seems. And 'linkspam'? Oh dear we do have issues here don't we? I'm not Amazon.com or offering cheap viagra you know, I'm just trying to get my site to the attention of people who might find it interesting, which I imagined might include people who have looked for Venice on the Wikipedia. You seem to be desperately trying to make me out a bad guy because otherwise, I presume, you realise that your spite and inflexibility becomes more obvious. I'm just a little guy providing content for no reward apart from the feeling of satisfaction I get from 'meeting' like-minded types on line and being part of a larger endeavour and community. As is proven by the fact that I'm bothering with you and your blinkered attitude, because just maybe...but no, I give up.
This is an "empire" consisting of millions of editors. The "empire" welcomes participation from anyone who agrees to abide by its established rules and policies. Some people, unfortunately, can't be bothered to learn them. Try reading WP:Spam#How not to be a spammer for starters, and pay special attention to item 2 and the last point in item 5. Those are the reasons your link gets reverted. If you want to participate here, learn how it's done. -Amatulic 20:52, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Dear User:Palazzo, I am sorry, but you really are in the wrong here. Even if you do not accept any of the other reasons, it is in any case specifically prohibited to place links your own website on Wikipedia. In addition to this, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a collection of links to things in which you or I think someone might possibly be interested. A link should only be placed if it is to a truly authoritative, almost unmissable site that goes into a level of detail in explaining the subject matter that would never be possible in the article itself. As such, as interesting as your site might well be to some people, and as well-meaning as you may well be in placing the link to it, it is being correctly deleted. --Bcnviajero 17:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Expansion

The article should be expanded. I purchased numerous books when visiting the historic city a few months ago and have collected some knowledge that may be useful for Wikipedia. When I find the time, I'll include the content. Never Mystic 22:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

external links

I´ve read some discussions about removing external links, many of them marked to be comercial or spammy just because they have some banners or external links without taking in consideration the value of the information related to an specific topic (Venice in this case).

Having banners is something absolutely normal in any website, even the official Venice sites have some. Take a look at "Official Tourism and Events Site of the City of Venice" it is full of banners! In fact, almost all external links have some kind of add or income that could make them to be considered comercial, just take a look at them.

I'm adding again Venice Voyager Guide as a Tourism Resource, because according to Google Analytics stats people that come from Wikipedia's Venice article visit an average of almost 6 pages (the guide has just 9!) and medium stay is over 6 minutes. So it is clear that this link is valuable for Wikipedia's visitors. Also, the only income source is Adsense non-intrusive contextual ads (no banners, no affiliates, no bookings, no pop-ups, etc.).

The same could be said for many external links I've seen they've been deleted most of them related with tourism. I'm sure some are spam, but many others sould be left in Wikipedia as they are valuable.


The site in question is neither authoritative nor a significant source of additional information, it simply has a few snippets (indeed, only nine pages, as you point out). It is therefore clearly not suitable for inclusion. Wikipedia is not a collection of links.

Are you the owner of the site?

--Bcnviajero 18:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Bcnviajero, you are removing it because you consider it a comercial link. Why? Due to some Adsense ads?

According to what you say, almost all external links in Venice should be deleted. Which of them are really an significant additional information source? I've taken a look at your history log and have seen you've deleted hundred of links of other touristic places. Some of them were really good, for example http://www.seemallorca.com/, it is a great source of information about people travelling to Mallorca. Please try to be more careful before doing a massive link removal.

Yes, I'm the proud owner. From Girona.


Well, firstly, bona tarda. Thanks for your quick reply.

Secondly, though, if you are the owner, it is against Wikipedia policy for you to put your own site as a link.

Thirdly, again considering the Wikipedia policy, yes, I agree that almost all the external links placed there should be removed. The sites should be authoritative, a "unique resource", and having some tourist information does not count as that. I have removed links that are commercial, broken, irrelevant, and those that may have a few bits of tourist information, but that clearly do not meet the criteria for inclusion. I accept that www.seemallorca.com is a borderline case. In my opinion it falls on the side of non-inclusion, but I am certainly open to opinions, as always. However, your site does not come close to this. I am not saying it is a bad site, simply that it is not the "must-have" resource that it would need to be for inclusion.

For your reference, the relevant policy is at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:External_Links

In any case, I do appreciate the considered and collaborative tone of your points...not always the case in Wikipedia!

--Bcnviajero 12:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

History, origins

line 6: Marcomanni "168-168" is surely wrong ---72.60.10.20 21:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

What do you suspect is wrong about it? The Marcomanni were very active in the late 2nd century. Antandrus (talk) 21:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Oh, 168 was repeated ... duh ... fixed it (166-168), using the dates from the Italian wiki. Antandrus (talk) 22:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

3d images

I removed 4 3d images from the page, because they cluttered the article and are ugly for a viewer without the appropriate glasses. They could be put in a specific page, linked from this article. GhePeU 11:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

  • image:tetrearch Ven.jpg|thumb|300px|centered|displays in Anachrome compatible 3D stereo.
  • Image:San Marco's.jpg|thumb|350px|right|Saint Mark's in compatible Anachrome 3D.
  • image:Venetian masks.jpg|thumb|300px|left|Displayed in Anachrome compatible 3D.
  • image:monument in Venice.jpg|thumb|300px|center|Displayed in compatible Anachrome 3D stereo.

That is a "book burning" act in a sense, as these "compatible" 3D images are not the regular "ugly" kind. The two best should be replaced, with very much small thumbnails. Media technology, once advanced from b&W to color. "Would you ban color?"3dnatureguy 19:29, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


The Blanking-Redirect

Whenever Turnstep gets back online, I'd like to apologize to him for making the blanking-redirect to New Orleans, LA for obvious reasons. After the end of August/beginning of September, New Orleans had more in common with Venice and you know why. I was giving myself a laugh but I guess that was in bad taste. --Shultz 05:13, 5 January 2006 (UTC) ;)

Venice Guide

If you ever go to Venice, avoid swimming in the canals. They are nastier than an ocean with oil. Ugh. There are some things needed for updating. Please enjoy your stay. Ugh...ugh...ugh...

I have never seen anyone swim or try to swim in the canals. Why would anyone do this? You only have to look at the water to know how dirty it will be.--217.202.117.38 (talk) 19:51, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Supposedly some people have recently taken on the silly habit of swimming along the yearly Vogare Longa race, rather than rowing it in a boat. I wouldn't do that without a fully enclosed helmet, double drysuit and closed-circuit rebreather, because the venetian canals are definitely haz-mat! 91.83.21.86 (talk) 21:58, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

History

I don't think the history is very clear. For example, it starts talking about one of the doges (not sure about the pluralisation) before it even introduces what a doge is. This should come first.

It also just seems very snippy and disjointed in general.

Thank you for your suggestion regarding [[: regarding [[:{{{1}}}]]]]! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to…) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. Bill 13:25, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Added external links

(a) The new subsection "Venice guides" is a useful idea.
(b) I don't see why remove the two excellent resources that were listed here before.
(c) All of the sites added by the anonymous editor are even more commercial than them, with money-earning subsections for renting apartments, selling hotel rooms, etc.
(d) Some of those added sites do have enough good info to make them valuable resources to be linked in a Wikipedia article.
(e) In my judgment, the following three don't contain much information about Venice; they're primarily vehicles for rentals and sales, and I've removed them:

Bill 20:21, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Saga continued of the guy who hates VeniceGuide and Venezia.Net: I've dumped a list of all the anonymous dial-up connections (s)he uses at User_talk:Noluogo, since that user, other than being registered, fits the pattern. They should very likely be considered a multiple-IP vandal rather than a useful contributor to Wikipedia. Bill 00:08, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

"remarkable" portrait of Venetian politics

This use of "remarkable" is not commendatory: it's the primary meaning of the word, roughly synonymous with "noteworthy", something that'll make your ears prick up. Unflattering stuff may or may not be noteworthy, but this is, well, something to be remarked: so the word is not only apposite but conveys additional information. There must be plenty of unflattering depictions of Venice, but in the opinion of the original writer, those others are not worth noting: and indeed, no one has produced another here, so the original writer may well be right! (Also, in a wider sense, if there were an NPOV concern, NPOV shouldn't be pushed too far: certain things are good, attractive, important, and Wikipedia does not forbid mentioning it: in this article on Venice — read it carefully — several things have been qualified as "major", "enlightened", "good", etc., and no one's felt the need to NPOV them. Bill 21:59, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

If it were not remarkable then we wouldn't remark on it. Without some further explanation for its reason for remarkableness, it serves no purpose in this context. Why is it remarkable? How many people have found it remarkable? (Very few, it appears). -Willmcw 22:43, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Now that's a better point. . . . I myself, for example, haven't the faintest idea whether the book is really remarkable or not, because I haven't read it. On the other hand, I'm not big on medieval Venice, and maybe in the restricted world of them that are, it is. There are plenty of works that are incontestably remarkable although very few people have read them: what counts is what proportion of those who might read them find them such, no?
(You have two good points, actually: the first is that it's a sort of pleonasm — and you're right about that. And then, on the other hand, it's somewhat akin to the artist painting a cow: guy standing in a field, painting a canvas solid white, kibitzer comes up asks him whassat? "It's a cow eating grass". "Oh? Where's the grass?" "Well, the cow ate it." "So where's the cow?" "Oh, once there was no more grass, she left." If we start eliminating the undoubted pleonasm that the book which is being remarked upon is remarkable, then we might eliminate that it's a book, and .... Only half kidding!) Best, Bill 23:57, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
(There's a wonderful Groucho Marx routine in which he helps a ship passenger edit his telegram down to nothing - I can't recall the movie.) We certainly want to state the obvious. But it isn't obvious that this book (yes, we should identify it as a book or novel) is "remarkable". A more remarkable, and possibly less fictitious, portrait of Venetian corruption is Casanova's Memoirs, written a few decades earlier but published just a few years before The Bravo.
Getting back to the 21st Century we might ask: Who cares? Well, it just so happens that somebody cares a great deal. The perennial presidential candidate, philosopher, and "greatest living economist" Lyndon LaRouche theorizes that the Venetian oligarchy is still alive and active, and is the center point of an Anglo-Dutch conspiracy headed by the Duke of Edinburgh, with help in America from Lynn Cheney (the brains of the Bush Administration), and with further assistance from George Soros, Peter Camejo, and miscellaneous stooges. Anyway, it's nice to see history kept alive. Cheers, -Willmcw 00:23, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
It just seems silly and unprofessional to me to call it "remarkable." john k 00:51, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
How many here have read The Bravo? Raise your hands. --HK 01:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
[half raised] I read the detailed plot summary here and other info here: http://external.oneonta.edu/cooper/articles/titles.html#bravo -Willmcw 06:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Ah, Herschel's here. Wonderful. So it is a weird LaRouchite move of some sort...I don't think it matters whether or not I've read The Bravo. I think it should not be described as "remarkable" because this is an awkward and stilted way to describe any book, even if it is actually remarkable. john k 06:43, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Certainly don't sound remarkable to me, at least from the stuff and link above.... Bill 18:30, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Venezia.Net

The policy page on deletion that you cite, which I've been familiar with for a coupla years now — but went back and checked anyway to see if it might have changed (it hasn't) — never mentions the word "commercial", and does not address the question of links, nor of commercial sites. The closest it comes is to say that "advertising" is grounds for deletion of an article. This hardly applies here; and again, the site is not one of the (many!) junk "sites" out there that are mere camouflage for selling you Viagra or hotel rooms or whatever: it's a real site with excellent content. I've reverted the link. I'll also add that I have no personal connection with the site, in case anyone was wondering. Bill 23:49, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Continued: despite being repeatedly asked to clarify their reasons, the anonymous (whose server dishes them up a new address each time) whose sole function in life seems to be to remove the links to these 2 useful sites in the article Venice — not even bothering to go to any of hundreds of Wikipedia pages with similar sites linked — has now taken to label reverts as "vandalism". Something is clearly going on that we are not being told: why does this one user so monomaniacally insist on deleting these websites? Very likely because they're some kind of competitor with an inferior site that is rightly being blocked here, as others have been. It is insufficient (and dishonest) to write "Deletion Policy", "Deletion Policy" (and even provide link to that page) when in fact that page says nothing — zero, zilch — about links to commercial sites. Nowhere has Wikipedia taken the policy of banning a good site merely because it has an ad or two: Wikipedia itself begs for money every few months, with banners on every page; and links to sites similar to Venezia.Net and VeniceGuide.Net are routinely provided, and not deleted by anyone, except this anonymous, on hundreds upon hundreds of pages. Nope, folks, we're dealing with a vandal, a coward, a fool, and someone with an ulterior motive, bent on making Wikipedia worse, less useful, in this one little article: so concerned about the purity of Wikipedia, whoever they are could do well to do some useful editing, adding articles, etc. (Note by the way that most of the trouble on Wikipedia — look at the vanity pages, the graffiti, the vandalism, the NewPages problems — comes from anonymous users; I hope others back my proposal to require registration to edit.) Bill 00:33, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Effects of global warming?

I read on a magasin which says that Venice is slowly submerged with water due to global warming and the rising of sea level. Is it true or is it just the effect of the sinking? --antilived T | C 08:30, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

As far as I know, Venice is sinking due to effects of global warming, i.e. rising sea levels, but also due to subsidence as the water-baring stratum has been overused and there are less sediments deposited in the lagoon. --Ivana 23:34, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

"Italian: Venetia"

That addition, as it reads, suggests that the Italian name for the Region is Venetia, but that's not right. The Italian name is Veneto, and "Venetia" is an old-fashioned or historical English (or Latin) term for the general area. The "Region" is the specific administrative division. Since Veneto is a link, it's good enough as is. Bill 09:25, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Islamic influence on Venetian governmental structure?

Edit by Mksmith 15:17, 10 August 2004
"...The Venetian governmental structure was a mix of Byzantine and Islamic systems..."

Venice had remarkable political and economic relations to islamic countries, but I never heard of Islamic influence on its governmental structure; can anybody corroberate this? --Tickle_me 00:38, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

I think we can almost certainly rule that out. Like their Genoese rivals the Venetians were heavily inspired by their islamic trading partners with regard to commerce, industry, and, particularly, nautics. Although it's true that the economic and the political spheres were inseparable in this "Trading Republic" and the heads of the Arsenal (from Ar. dar as-sina'ah), of the Fondaco dei tedeschi, which was exactly modelled on the funduq for the Venetians in Alexandria, and the admirals (from Ar. amir-ar-rahl) played a crucial role in the Senat, the repulic was at least in the 14th century a classic aristocracy and a weak elective monarchy (like the HRE or Poland) with complex gouverning councils. The islamic trading partners of that time, like the Mamluks, the Mongolian Khanates, the Anatolian emirats or later the Ottoman Empire were autocracies within the limits of the shari'a with comparatively chaotic political successions and arbitrary decision making. The Islamic system has more in common with the Byzantine caesaropapism, not with the Republic of Venice. The republic more or less copied the political processions and the cult of state from Byzantium though, in which it replaced the cult of the emperor with the cult of the evangelist San Marco, as whose high priest the doge almost apeared.Teodorico 17:48, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
So... how should we change the article? FireWorks 18:35, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Pruning the external links

There's a lot of chaff in here; despite my pruning, there still is, but the benefit of doubt doesn't hurt.

The proof of the pudding, that people have only been adding random stuff or their own pages, without caring about the quality of the Wikipedia resource, is that the official site of the city of Venice was not among the lists; I've fixed that, of course. Also: the "Venice Directory" is not what it claims (try going there and clicking on a few of the categories). Tom Gore's site is 25 barely captioned pictures, and Arglist is not much better — thousands of sites like this. The "St. Mark's Clock Tower" item is kaput, now links to a junk page. Multimap doesn't belong here, rather under the link automatically generated by the geographical coördinates. Bill 8 July 2005 22:23 (UTC)

For some purposes Arglist is better than most of the countless Venice photo galleries on the web: I've waived all copyright restrictions on the images, and the high-resolution (such as you can get with 6MP camera) are linked. Hence, they may be useful for Wikipedia. Ghouston 09:23, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
Yes, that's very generous of you Gary, and may be very useful to someone. Specifically, for Wikipedia, you (or someone else) might upload one or two of them to Wiki Commons: illustrations of Venice, canals, boats, Italian houses, etc. You might consider doing one or two yourself, maybe from your other specialized stuff (Ostend, laurel plants, birds, bugs — elsewhere in your pages, under the same copyright waiver). I've reinstated the link because of that (also because of the sheer number of photos, over 100 — even if not as varied as they could be — is more than 25‑30 pix). It's still important to watch this Links section, though, or else we'll be flooded with very inferior sites trying to pump up their Google ratings.... Best, Bill 11:41, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
Thanks Bill. I've uploaded images to the commons when they seemed to be lacking in the English Wikipedia. The extra offsite backup is a bonus. Ghouston 12:46, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
Yes, but keep that under your hat as much as you can; Wikipedia is not a storage device, either: people have got banned for that. (No, you are most unlikely to, since you are providing a useful service to the community: but a few days ago I ran across some schmuck who'd decided to store their whole hard-disk as a Wikipedia article!!! and I think who was permanently banned as a result.) B, Bill 19:40, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Pruning, subsection: Tom Gore's site

On this one, I've just reverted my deletion again. 25 raw photos, just barely captioned, does not make a useful site on Venice worth including here. There is nothing wrong with Tom Gore's photos, but Wikipedia is not a link farm, and there are hundreds of similar small sites with a few photos of Venice. If someone wants to improve the Venice article (as opposed just to getting some particular site linked here), they could do Wikipedia a service by ferreting out the great sites on Venice, and adding them instead. There are several not listed here; I just added one; if someone wants to find it, there's also a very good site by a woman named Shannon who wrote a book called something like ChowBella, about eating in Venice; etc. Bill 19:40, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

65.10.152.86 (talk) 19:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC)All these rules are ruining wikipedia, which should return to the goal of being the peoples' encyclopedia. Witness the Venice article as a fine example. It feels and looks like a thin standard tourist brochure of dull-info. I want to know what the people who've been there think of Venice and I want to see all their personally interesting little pictures not just a few establishing photos like a glossy magazine feature. Wiki is starting to feel like a compendium of conventional wisdom, not a democratic observation of the peoples' reality. Shame. Lighten up! 65.10.152.86 (talk)

Removed my other photos as well.

I removed my other photos as well. Someone had removed some initially feeling they were of no value and I put them back on the page with captions, which I thought made them relevent, however, they were deleted again, with no comments on the talk/discussion page. I removed my other photos as well. Glenlarson 17:07, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Population

Does Venice really have a population of 273,000? My understanding was that Venice itself was quite small, and that it was the city across the lagoon (Mestre?) that had most of the people. john k 01:32, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes, Venice, as far as i know, has a pop of about 270.000. You are right when you say that the most part of population doesn't live in the main island. There are some other island around venice and there is a small town located in the land, called Mestre. The point is that both Mestre and the other islands are Venice, not only the old town center in the main island is Venice; all those areas are in the same "Comune", called Venice. Serfalco 14:12, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

While Venice (the main islands) and Mestre (the city just across the water on the mainland) are both considered to be Venice most Italians would only refer to Mestre as Mestre. The population of Venice (the islands) is roughly 50,000 but I can't find a source for this.--217.202.117.38 (talk) 19:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Venice the band

Venice is not just the name of many beautiful cities all over the world, it is also the name of a band from Venice, CA. www.venicecentral.com


i agree completely

Names of Venice

The article currently says "Venice (Italian Venezia, German Venedig)"... well, yes, and in French it's Venise, and in Polish it's Wenecja, and in Catalan it's Venecia. And so on. Any reason why German specifically was singled out? I would say keep the English name and the Italian name and that's it... Acheron 05:07, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

(that is, the main Venice article says that.. apparently talk:Venice is redirecting to talk:Venice(disambiguation)...) Acheron 05:09, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The German name is of historical interest, since Venice was for a while part of the Austrian empire. I think it is appropriate for an encyclopedia article to list its subject's name in various languages --- particularly when these differ in spelling. You might say that having a city's name "translated" by speakers of other languages is an indication of true fame. Monomoit (talk) 18:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

The etymology of Venice "vernire etiam" is not generally accepted. The name is probably much older, going back to pre-roman times. Here's a source: http://worldheritage.heindorffhus.dk/frame-ItalyVenice.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.60.215.223 (talk) 18:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

specially chosen wood

"made of a wood specially chosen because it strengthens with age" Does anyone know what this wood is? 18:36, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Venice territory

The city of Venice doesn't consist only in the old town center (the main island), there are also other five areas that are included in the Venice territory. If you say Venice, you may mean "old town center (the main island shown in the pics inside the articles)", but you may also mean another zone, like the "Lido (with the Casinò and the hotel Des Bains)", or "Marghera (an important industrial zone near the lagoon)", or "Mestre (a town with about 200.000 people, and a quite important train station)". So, i think that the article is not complete. Pheraps should be sufficient a disambiguation page, before thinking about editing the page i thought it was better discuss this problem.

Venice metropolitan area description Serfalco 14:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Marco Polo Italian or Venetian ?

How Italian was Marco Polo? Venetians at that time were not just Italian...other ethnic groups were included, including Croats and Montenegrins (Slavs). Marco Polo in his time was known as Venetian and Dalmatian, only recently have people called him Italian. Was he born in Korcula Croatia? Did he spend time there? If he was and did he would be Croatian by origin. In those times Korcula was under Venice rule and the people were mostly ethnic Slavs not Italians.

Evergreen Montenegro1 03:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

This is a recent legend. It's enough to read the Polo's book "il Milione", to understand this. Marco Polo is always called "venitian". There is no evidence that it was born in Curzola. By the way, in the Middle Age, in the coastal Dalamatia there was a latin population (latin for language and culture), so it's no possible to affirm to a Dalmatian was "slav", simply beacuse he was dalmatian.

What does the following sentence in para 1 mean?

It is also the seat of Education in Europe. This means that it provides great education it is the heart of great education in Europe

Why does it link to EU (the European Union article)? David Blandford 09:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Russian lumber

The wood that the city that was built on, which doesn't seem to rot, is named 'Russian lumber'. But was it imported from Russia or is that just the name and actually came from somewhere else?[[[Link title]]] -G

Football

Does Venice have a football club? Ffda 15:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

S.S.C. Venezia. GhePeU 15:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Venice. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 05:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Columbus

Columbus should not be mentioned as "discovering" America; it was already inhabited by the indigenous peoples, thus they discovered it. 50.68.172.46 (talk) 15:29, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Columbus's "discovery" of the New World has been standard phrasing, however Eurocentric. We could say Columbus's voyages or expeditions. Changing it to something like "rediscovery" seems clumsy to me, as would other choices, such as "found", etc., which also don't seem helpful. Dhtwiki (talk) 19:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
How about "arrived" or "landed in"? 50.68.172.46 (talk) 19:24, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Currently, the relevant text reads Next, Christopher Columbus discovered the New World in 1492. I resist changing it from standard phrasing, but I can see the point of its seeming insensitive to some. I think "first arrived in" or "first explored" for "discovered" are okay. Then there's the fact that "New World" itself is Eurocentric. That could be changed to, say, "the Americas" without much injury, I think. Dhtwiki (talk) 20:36, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
I don't really see why it is necessary to mention him here at all - in the long term the switch of trade to Atlantic routes was bad for Venice, but that point isn't really made. Johnbod (talk) 22:09, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Yes, come to think of it, that sentence does stand out for its irrelevance, where, upon further investigation, it seems that Spanish exploration was a reaction to Portuguese trading monopolies along the African, Indian, Indonesian, etc. coasts, not Venice's monopoly of the Mediterranean. And the Age of Discovery, in general, seems dependent on technological achievements as much as any concerted attempt to undermine Venetian trading dominance. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:07, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
"First arrived in" also has problems ;-) I've been bold and tried sidestepping. Sparafucil (talk) 23:10, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Interesting concept: It's Italian ineptitude – not cruise ships – that is ruining Venice

Most of this article is behind a paywall, but here is part of it

It was probably inevitable that the terrible floods which devastated parts of Venice recently would stir the city’s No Grande Navi (No Big Ships) brigade into action.

No one can see the images of people wading through St Mark’s Square and not feel saddened about the damage being done to this great city.

This year the floods have been exceptional, reaching up to 187cm and lapping at the heels of the record 194cm recorded in November 1966.

I am too young to remember, but I am willing to stick my neck out and suggest that the city saw barely any cruise ships in those days. In other words, cruises and floods are two separate matters. Peter K Burian (talk) 15:25, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:55, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

American English

Per MOS:RETAIN, the original editions of this article were written in American English, and so it shall be retained in the spelling of words such as "center" and "color". I have tagged the article with the appropriate template. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 15:44, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Elizium23 I had rather thought the opposite, but I may be wrong. Would you mind proving your point with diffs please? Thank you DBaK (talk) 22:43, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
The article was started by an American, or at least someone who identified themselves as living in Michigan. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:04, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
That doesn't matter in the least, since a) it was then a stub, and b) there are no WP:ENGVAR differences that I can spot. In fact the first appearance of a engvar difference appears to be British English, in this March 2002 version, with a "centre". It was beyond a stub at that point. This is where MOS:RETAIN kicks in ("When no English variety has been established and discussion does not resolve the issue, use the variety found in the first post-stub revision that introduced an identifiable variety"). The article used BrE (maybe not exclusively) in January this year and also April 2020. Of course all these pesky students no doubt use AmE, as they invariably do, but this is minor. Johnbod (talk) 00:47, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Looking back in the history, & just at "centre/center" (obviously a key word for the city), I see there have actually been considerable numbers of both spellings for years - the lead alone has had both for some time. Dhtwiki, I see you were introducing new "centre"s back in 2019. So we should agree the article is in a mess and establish a clear choice by consensus now. Johnbod (talk) 01:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
I went through the talk archive & can't see a previous discussion on the matter. Johnbod (talk) 01:11, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
I'm fine with either, with a slight preference for BE because of your discovery of the early BE choice (2002). (And of course let's make it consistent now.) Antandrus (talk) 03:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Okay, I missed this revision with "centre" so I can agree with British English. Elizium23 (talk) 03:08, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Ok, also supporting British English. Thanks all. Johnbod (talk) 14:02, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
I seem to have been copying "centre"s and adding a "center" or two, and not caring about, possibly not even seeing, the difference. I counted more "center"s in the April 2019 edit and an even number in the January 2021 edit you link. Having Engvar depend on who makes the first deviation seems no less arbitrary than having it depend on the nationality of the stub creator. If we have consensus on this, someone may have to correct my spelling, as I tend toward the American variety (although I will probably be conscious of certain British spellings, and employ them, I may find it hard to write words such as "programme" and "organisation", or adhere to British prepositional usage). Dhtwiki (talk) 20:58, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
It is of course pretty arbitary, especially as the edit was one of 3 by an isp, but it is is what the policy says. If we agree on BrE, I'm happy to do a conversion of the most obvious differences. Johnbod (talk) 02:36, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
It is indeed arbitrary as you say, but it is all we've got, as you also say! Origin of first editor couldn't work any better, as it is only clear if they are an IP. And, if we are going to do this (and it appears that we must), then the first serious-sized article that decides between color and colour or tire and tyre is probably as good as anything else. And, again, is all we have. I absolutely despise nationalism over dialects of English but I really really hate articles with mixed spellings even more, so I agree it's good to fix this and move on. I use BrE myself but I edit quite a lot of articles, for example on German topics, where an AmE speaker got in first and there is no reason to change it, and, yup, we just have to live with the variations. Indeed it is probably good for the soul, in some complex way. I do get it that we are not voting, but if we were then my not-vote would also be for BrE. Cheers DBaK (talk) 07:47, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Awisbar.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kristinnmason, Briaxbrown.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://nautarch.tamu.edu/CRL/conservationmanual/File6.htm,
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Venice/Archive_1&oldid=1141634418"