Category talk:South Tyrol

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Merge with Category:Province of Bolzano[edit]

According to its contents and w:South Tyrol, this category concerns the same province than Category:Province of Bolzano. However, there is currently a discussion about the province name in w:Talk:South Tyrol#Official Name; therefore, I suggest to wait the end of the debate, before to proceed the merge (with the correct category name). --Juiced lemon 13:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Move request[edit]

I've put a request for moving category South-Tyrol to Province of South Tyrol; I report here a discussion I had with Gryffindor

Hi; I saw your revert of the category South Tyrol; I proposed to move it to Province of South Tyrol, because the standardization with english named categories started by LemonJuice. What's your opinion with this matter? --mac 11:25, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. As far as I know, we are apparently going by the naming scheme on the English Wikipedia for provinces and countries, basically which means "use the English name". Since both the names are corresponding exactly with each other on the Commons and on the English Wikipedia, I see no use to have a renaming. sincerely Gryffindor 11:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you; there is no urgent need, but only a reasonable reason for standardization. As you know, all italian provinces are named something like "province of...", all except South-Tyrol. Do you see any obstacle to adopt such as standard also for this cat? Ciao, --mac 11:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I think for autonomous provinces and regions there are exceptions, and therefore do not fall under the naming scheme, see also Category:Aosta Valley. also the provinces themselves seem to have different patterns, such as Category:Messina (Prov). AFAIK countries and provinces and regions go with the shortest English name possible, such as South Korea and not the official "Republic of Korea". Gryffindor 14:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Just to keep talking....Aosta Valley has no province at all, so it has no sense make an empty category and yes, there are several categories named like messina (prov) and about these was the concern of LemonJuice; he started to move these categories but he simply didn't finish the work. I'm continuing but not a regular base. You right when you said South Tyrol is a special province, in Italy it has a large autonomy. Nevertless there is an administrative entity called provincia di...so do you mind if I start a pubblic discussion on this matter?--mac 14:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Honestly I am not interested in importing any sort of the debate about the topic as has been going on in the English Wikipedia, if you see the discussion there. The name implies more than just the autonomous province, it is historical as well and I think it best to leave it at that simple name. Provinces on the Commons normally only carry the simple name, not the official one, see also Category:Virginia which is not called "State of Virginia" or "Virginia (state)". You can obviously start a discussion if you want but I believe it is best to leave it under the most common name it is under. Gryffindor 15:38, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I belived that english wikipedia and commons are different projects, so I don't think that here english wiki "rules" can be applied automaticly, but maybe I'm wrong (I'll will ask this to an admin). The problem is that italian provinces have the same name of italian cities, so we can't have rome for the city and rome for province, this way Juiced lemon stard to rename all italian province. I'm extremly convinced of the utility of standardizations, this way I've asked to move this category; of course any italian province as it's own history and history and culture and language, but I honestly I don't think it's a reason that can affect the name of the category. --mac 09:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
When there is a city and a province of the same name, such as "Messina", it obviously makes sense to make a "Messina (province)". However in the case of autonomous provinces such as "South Tyrol" and "Aosta Valley", there is no conflict of disambiguation. Gryffindor 13:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I really can't see a reason to manage this province in a special way. See Category:Provinces_of_Italy; each of those as it's special characteristic, nevertless they are provinces of Italy.--mac 16:05, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Because they are both autonomous, so obviously they are different than the other provinces. Gryffindor 16:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
The debate on the English Wiki has ended to keep the name as "South Tyrol", I propose to remove the renaming tag if there are no further objections. Gryffindor 12:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Move request of 17 04 2009 - second try[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Second try because Italian province names are much more in harmony by now. --Foroa (talk) 10:53, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Question: Hello, to which name exactly do you propose to move South Tyrol to? And would a name change affect only Category:South Tyrol or all subcategories as well? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 20:30, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Only an additional prefix "Province of " to make it coherent with the other province names; all the rest remains unchanged. --Foroa (talk) 21:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Hmm, that does not seem to be congruent with your quest for consistency because all other provinces have the prefix "province of xyz" also in the subcategories (see for example Province of Belluno). Thus, it would be probably only a question of time until some other user demands to bring all subcategories of South Tyrol, too, in line with the rest. However, I find long names such as "Cities and villages in the Province of South Tyrol" unnecessarily bulky. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 23:40, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose a) the only two provinces specifically mentioned in the Italian constitution are the two of the region Trentino-Südtirol, as they are: the most autonomous provinces, the only ones which autonomy is guaranteed by an international treaty and also for historical reasons as both provinces were for over 500 years part of the Austrian "Erblande" (the Habsurgs family private possession). as with all provinces the name in official documents is "Province of" followed by the provinces capital, but the only two provinces that have a distinct widely and definitely more often used historic name are Trentino and South Tyrol; putting them at "Province of" is like changing all US-states categories to "State of" California/Texas/Arizona and so on. Therefore I oppose this move request; especially as it is the second time this is done and repeating such requests is a waste of everybody's time. --Noclador (talk) 00:11, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In Italy nobody knows the name "South Tyrol". The Region is "Trentino-Alto Adige", and the two official provinces of this Region are the "Provincia di Trento" and the "Provincia di Bolzano". IMHO it is ridiculous that it's not possible to have a coherence with names in Category:Provinces of Italy because a little part of Italy, which speaks german, do not accept (for historical reasons) to be a part of Italy. At this time they are part of Italy ! In Italy we have other autonomous provinces: so we will change all them? I propose that the name of the category is his official name: Province of Bolzano (and not Province of South Tyrol!); and than, for all the other names (South Tyrol, Süd Tirol, Alto Adige, Provinz Bozen, etc.) we make redirects. (The same, of course, for the Province of Trento <-- Trentino). Best regard, --DenghiùComm (talk) 06:13, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Such a prefix goes clearly against common use at Commons, since neither the French departments, nor the US states, nor the German Bundesländer go by such a prefix. So, the real question is why should the Italian political entities alone be called "Province of"? Such an exception is against the Commons standard. Besides, the province itself clearly prefers to go by "South Tyrol": [see here]. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 14:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment: No! In Italy the most important cities are at the same time municipalities and Provinces. So it's necessary to distinguish the city from the Province. If you say Rome, this means the city of Rome. Province of Rome is another thing: it's a territory around Rome with a lot of other municipalities different of Rome but part of the Province of Rome. This is the fact that it is absolutly necessary to put the distinction "Province of".! USA and Germany have other situations than Italy: e.g. in Germany the Bundesländer have not the same name of the cities (exept Berlin). This is the difference! --DenghiùComm (talk) 15:11, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Dear DenghiùComm, in France all French departments are named by default by rivers, mountains and other geographical entities, still no confusion arises. The "province" just needs to be added in brackets to the name, just like they did in Category:Ardennes (department). Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 15:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
So, where is the problem? That you will change "Province of Rome" in "Rome (province)"? And this for all the provinces of Italy? Is this not the same? Where is the big difference? I don't understand... Best regard --DenghiùComm (talk) 16:06, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
The point is there is no problem; the French case clearly shows that is is completely practical to rename all Italian province from "Province of Rome" to "Rome (province)", so that the Category:Provinces of Italy is in line with the other categories (France, Germany, USA, UK, Spain, etc.). Gun Powder Ma (talk) 20:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment: Foroa, your quest for harmony of South Tyrol and Trentino with the Italian naming system is clearly at odds with the equally justified quest for higher order harmony of the Italian provincial names with other (Western) states. What is your view on that? Why do you value the standard of Category:Provinces of Italy higher than the standard established throughout Commons? I find that a contradiction in terms. I am inclined to open up a vote on Category:Provinces of Italy to bring its naming system in line with the rest of Commons. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 15:00, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, I have little time to reply completely, but here already an attempt.
Most province names start with (with hindsight, ridiculous) assumption that names should be as short as possible, so most province categories start with a very short name. As those names, especially in southern Europe, overlap with city, old city kernel, river, region names, I have to spend a significant part of my time disambiguation/renaming them. The naming system is different in all countries, and tend to take the naming rule applied by the first provinces that add disambiguation. So my conclusion is that you better take upfront a naming rule that is consistent and can survive even when all (sub)categories develop very far.
I received a move request, and in that light, I was going to execute it as for me, it was perfectly logical and in line with the other Italian provinces. Again, the most important is to have at each country level, a consistent naming suystem; there is no such a thing as Commons world naming rule at the province level (Or "higher order harmony " as you call it). Then I remembered some troubles with the naming in South Tirol, so I decided to issue a formal move request. So don't hack on me because I postposed a completely logical action to allow you to discuss about it.
What I read between the lines in the reactions, is that there is a political/cultural/historical/language/identity agenda to avoid using the names as used in the Italian or English articles, (en:Province of Bolzano-Bozen or Alto Adige or Province of Bolzano (official name in Italian).}} which I will take if you guys don't find an agreement. --Foroa (talk) 18:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure whether that would be such a good idea because it would only prompt quite certainly another row on the WP.en article en:Province of Bolzano-Bozen, and then very soon people would be here back again demanding another change on the grounds of just your reasoning. So far, I don't see anything in Commons which warrants your supposition that provincial names have only to be congruent on the national level, but not beyond. You have concede that your proposal is at odds with the established practice in the US, German and French cases, as well as the Category:Counties of England and the Category:Autonomous communities of Spain. IMO it is best to leave it as it is. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 20:57, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Only solid arguments please. I can give you as many examples of "province/region/district of xxx" and "xxx province/county" as you can give with "xxx (province)", and anyway, the commons namings rule are too fuzzy; making it more strict would require renaming 60 % of all categories. Again, the most important for now is the consistency at Italian level. --Foroa (talk) 21:21, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
This is as solid an argument as it gets, and you know so. Feel free to provide counter-examples to prove your point. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 12:54, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Same reason as Category:Trentino and Category:Aosta Valley, in this case they are both autonomous provinces that form an autonomous region and therefore do not fall under the "Province of X" naming scheme. Gryffindor (talk) 05:19, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment: This is not a good example. Aosta Valley it's an unicum. It's the only part of Italy where the Region, the Province, and the Municipality have the same name! Because it's a very little Region, where 100% are high mountains. --DenghiùComm (talk) 06:28, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment:"In Italy nobody knows the name "South Tyrol" By the way Mister DenghiùComm it seems to be, that you're dreaming. All people living in South-Tirol (that's in Italy) knows the name South-Tyrol because the official name for the province is (in the official usuable three languages): Autonome Provinz Bozen – Südtirol, in italian: Provincia autonoma di Bolzano - Alto Adige, in ladinian: Provinzia Autonòma de Balsan – Südtirol! Could it be, that you don't know that? Okay, so you will take it just as an information. regards --Caduta sassi (talk) 11:41, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
In fact "South Tyrol" said only the german speaking people. In italian nobody say "Sud Tirolo", but they say "Alto Adige". This is all of Italy, without the Province of Bolzano of course. And in Italy very few people speaks german! (only 341.371 people = 0,57% of the italian people). This is the reality; and this is what I think. --DenghiùComm (talk) 18:37, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment It is common for Italian provinces to have another name, different from the province capital; yet often this name is not well known in the rest of Italy, does not coincide perfectly with the province or is used in an improper way. Some examples: Friuli (province of Udine), Venezia Giulia (may be used for the province of Trieste alone, or including Gorizia), Aretino (was a poet, but may be used for the province of Arezzo), Genovesato (the province of Genova, but not exactly).
There are other strange cases, like the Provincia of Pesaro and Urbino (biggest towns Pesaro and Fano!). South Tyrol is probably more precisely cohincident with the province that the previous examples (except Friuli). Furthermore, heatedly debated linguistic and hetnic questions (and their teenage advocates you often meet on the internet) make it very difficult to decide which is the correct name.
In particular, the name "Südtirol" is very seldom used outside of itself, it is actually very difficult to pronounce for an italian mother tongue, hence "Alto Adige" or "Sud Tirolo" are normally preferred. Yet, if you look on google for a number of hits, "Südtirol" and "Alto Adige" have comparable diffusion (the latter being twice as much popular as the former), Sud Tirolo is negligible.
Honesly, I'm not sure what I would use. Personally I don't think "Province of Bozen" nor "Province of Bolzano" sounds offensive: if an English name is lacking but an Italian and a German name are present an English speaker may choose the one over the other depending on several factors (i.e. Trieste/Triest vs. Gorizia/Görz). I'm not able to choose, but a survey on native-english speakers could prove useful.
If you scrap the "Province of", than in an hypotetical "Italian Commons" I would choose Alto Adige for sure; but in the actual Commons, probably "South Tyrol" can be preferred, but only because of a linguistic affinity between English and German, not for diffusion reason.
147.122.5.195 16:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
The problems and the questions are a lot. I think that it's better to stay by the official names of the provinces. An other official link is here (download "Denominazioni e codici di ripartizioni, province e regioni") --DenghiùComm (talk) 21:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
The province itself prefers to go by "South Tyrol": official homepage. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 19:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
"South Tyrol"? I don't understand what you mean. This official homepage speaks from "Alto Adige", and the link is www.provincia.bz.it (BZ means Bolzano!). Best regard --DenghiùComm (talk) 20:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I see rarely such tendentious debates. The site states clearly: Official site of the Autonomous Province of Bozen - South Tyrol. --Foroa (talk) 06:50, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, it depends on the language version... it displays "Alto Adige" if you select the Italian one. Nevertheless, I agree with you: this debate is gettin extremely tendentious, South Tyrol is a good name and not ambiguous, I see no reason not to use it. 147.122.5.195 09:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
The official name in English is btw also "Autonomous province of Trentino" (or Trento), but, anyway, I have yet to see any rationale which shows that official names are to preferred over the most commons ones, and any combination with "province of" is definitely not used in common language. Let's face it, there are no established criteria yet, which could guide our decision, so I don't know why the subject has to be brought up time and again. Instead, we should continue to concentrate on contents. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 11:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps in all this debate we lose the real problems which are at the origin of all this.

  • We have categories like Category:Provinces of Italy or Category:Coats of arms of provinces of Italy where the names are not coherent about the two provinces of the italian region Trentino-Alto Adige (in german: Trentino-Südtirol). For historical reasons the german speaking part of this region doesn't accept to be consider a province of Italy. In fact Trentino and South Tyrol are provinces of Italy, officially called "Provincia di Trento" and "Provincia di Bolzano" (see the official names of the provinces in Italy and the official homepages of the two provinces).
  • Gun Powder Ma (which doesn't know the administrative subdivisions in Italy) propose to abolish "Province of...". This is not possible, because "Province of..." is a territory round a city with a lot of municipalities. The territory round Rome called Province of Rome is not the same of Rome, which is only the municipality of the city of Rome. A city is in a Province, but a Province is not a city!
  • Other problem is the language that we will translate in english. Italian or german? The "Province of Bolzano" is a territory called in italian "Alto Adige", in german "Südtirol". What do we choice? I have proposed to use the name that it's more used and know from the italian people (quite 60 millions), and not the name which is only used from the german speaking italians (341.371 people). Is this tendentious?

So, these are the problems. Please, debate to resolve these problems! Thank You. Regards, --DenghiùComm (talk) 21:07, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I did not propose that. I pointed out that the current naming system of the Italian provinces is inconsistent with those of other comparable states which calls not for the current Province of Rome, but for Rome (province). I am further pointing out that any change of "Category:South Tyrol" would also entail a change of the numerous subcategories of South Tyrol, but, since Foroa says that "all the rest remains unchanged", his 'solution', while giving superficial coherence to the Italian provinces, would actually come at the price of creating an incoherent naming scheme in the South Tyrol subcategories. So, for a real debate, I believe it is necessary that the user who proposed the move would present a detailed case for his move request, because, if coherence is indeed the main point, both the proposal itself and its effects are utterly incoherent. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 01:23, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
When I was a student, I had a professor which said: There are two manners to say NO; one is to say: No; the other is to say: YES, but we make it so great (that finally it's not possible to realize it). Now I understand what Gun Powder Ma say; but this is a very big problem. At this moment we have to resolve a problem about South Tyrol, and this we have to do now. After we can debate the solution of the global problem, and perhaps change the names of thousands of categories and under-categories. At this moment, I think, the problem about South Tyrol give us enough to do. I think that it's better to do one thing at the time. --DenghiùComm (talk) 20:59, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Some would call that a smoke mask; it seems very frequently used by some folks. I am surprised to note that on the Italian speaking side, they are so tolerant and compromise oriented while from the German speaking side, tolerance is far from being impressive. --Foroa (talk) 21:10, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Be careful with such remarks. They may be viewed by many as chauvinistic, and are rightfully frowned upon at Wikipedia. The only thing which is yet far from impressive is your partialness, which you amply showed by moving categories unilaterally against consensus, and without providing any substantial reasons. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 21:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Move. South Tyrol i a historical region i italy. The administrative names for the province are Provincia autonoma di Bolzano, Autonome Provinz Bozen and Provinzia autonoma de Bulsan. 78.69.85.108 15:12, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
No, keep that the category as it is. Gryffindor (talk) 17:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Since when are anonymous IPs allowed to vote? Again the official administrative names in English are either South Tyrol or Autonomous Province of Bozen - South Tyrol. But then again, noone has yet sufficiently explained why the official forms should be used here at all? The standard thoughout Commons is rather the most common name, and this is most clearly not any derivative of province. IMO the discussion should be closed, the two weeks time for finding a consensus is up, and it has been clearly shown that the proposal does lead to less coherence, not more (apart from the fact that there were no reasons whatsoever provided why "coherence" with other categories should be placed above established English usage which is South Tyrol). Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 21:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
South Tyrol (like Trentino) is a geographical area; but our problem is the Province. Now South Tyrol = Province of Bolzano/Bozen. The official name is Autonomous Province of Bozen: I would let aside the word "autonomous", because we have Autonomous Regions too, and that a province or a region is autonomuos, this is an administrative problem which doesn't interest Commons. So I think it's better to say simply Province of Bozen, and not Autonomous Province of Bozen (so we say Sicily and not Autonomous Region of Sicily; Aosta Valley and not Autonomous Region of Aosta Valley, etc.). Then we can decide if we will say Province of Bolzano or Province of Bolzano/Bozen. After all this we can decide the global problem "Province of NameCity" or "NameCity (province)". I have no problem that in a second time all the Provinces of Italy are moved in "NameCity (province)": for me it's not important the form. Important is that, if it is a Province, this word will be keept, because it distinguish the territory from the city. --DenghiùComm (talk) 05:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

As yet again I am the only one from the place (Meran) and as I found this rather incoherent statement "the name that it's more used and know from the italian people (quite 60 millions), and not the name which is only used from the german speaking italians (341.371 people)" (pff, what a joke - if we start to do things this way don't forget that there are 8 million Austrians, 82 Million Germans, 9 million Swedes and so on, who also call the place South Tyrol. so the conclusion you draw is pretty obvious useless.) in Italy in fact provinces are named after their "capital" city and regions have historic names; provinces have 0 executive/legislative power, which is concentrated at the regional level! However this is different for the 2 provinces of Bolzano and Trento, which have legislative power (more then all other regions) and the region has almost not powers anymore. Why then not divide the region and give South Tyrol and Trentino its old names back? For the simple reason that Italy would need to a) change the constitution to do that b) would have to renegotiate and change a treaty with Austria c) would have to go to the UN (with Austria) to announce the agreed changes and d) would need to change some minor things in Austrias EU-accession treaty... so the only reason the name Province of Bolzano and Province of Trento have not been scrapped are the complications that would ensue. Needless to say that the people (and the goverment in both provicnes) all prefer and use the old, historic names - which are as entrenched as i.e. Lombardia, Veneto, Lazio and so on. the discussion boils down to: a) do we stick with the official names that the people in the area reject and which are unknown to most people in the world or b) go with the most common names, the historic names, the used names and the accepted names? As for me: I have a clear preference for Trentino and South Tyrol. To give an example - if Obama changed US states names to State of Atlanta, State of Albany, State of Sacramento - would anyone accept/use them?? I guess not. Such things can only be done in dictatorships and in fact it were the fascist that introduced the names Province of Bolzano and Province of Trento. therefore I say: stop the constant move attempts (a waste of everybody's time) and move Trentino back to name, where it belongs too: Trentino! --Noclador (talk) 22:08, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Historical names are a criterion, but it's not an objective criterion. Different way we have to speak of Japigia and not of Apulia, from Etruria and not of Tuscany. And it's not a criterion the million of german speaking people: if milliards of Chineses say "Nabulesi" (那不勒斯) for Naples, will we choice this name for our categories? Anyway I stay by the opinion that it's important to privilege the official names, and for all other names we can make redirects or under-categories. Above I proposed a solution, which I think it's a good and equilibrated solution for all need. --DenghiùComm (talk) 06:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
a) Japigia and Etruria are not in use anymore - South Tyrol is still widely used today!
b) you wanted to change names arbitrarily by using population numbers (60 million Italians vs 340.000 South Tyroleans), now you are against it and bring the Chinese in,... your argumentation is not logical.
c) then you say: "In Italy nobody knows the name "South Tyrol"" but google.it finds 592.000 hits for Südtirol and 118.000 hits for Sudtirolo in Italian!
d) in my view the categories must be "South Tyrol" and "Trentino". --Noclador (talk) 16:59, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
It's correct! I sayd: the millions of people is NOT a criterion. And it's correct that in Italy they don't say "Sudtirolo". In fact italian people say "Alto Adige" (in google: 7.110.000 hits!)! For our provinces is not important what the milliards of Chineses or the swedish people says; it's important what the italian people says! Best regards. --DenghiùComm (talk) 18:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
You said to base the name on what Italians say, now you say that is not a criterion, to say a line later that this is a criterion... ??? confusing! also: it is irrelevant what Italians say, but what the world says: (i.e. Category:Rome, Category:Milan not Roma and not Milano); and in English the name most used is by far "South Tyrol". --Noclador (talk) 05:44, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
There is a problem more when we consider that in Commons the official language is english. Now I changed my opinion in that discussion. --DenghiùComm (talk) 14:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, DenghiùComm - I'm totally confused now: could you please clarify what now actually is the version you support (with the link to that discussion I am now unsure if you favor actually South Tyrol here and there or if you support it there and oppose it here). thanks in advance, for your reply. --Noclador (talk) 15:20, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Noclador, I will help you to coming out of your confusion.

  • The official language of Commons is english. Personally I am against the translation of names. In fact in Commons we have the most important cities of Italy (Torino, Milano, Venezia, Padova, Firenze, Roma, Napoli, Siracusa, ...) which are categorisated in the correspondent english name. And so some italian regions (Piedmont, Lombardy, Tuscany, Sardinia, Sicily, ...)
  • For the Trentino-Alto Adige we have the problem of the german speaking part, in italian called "Alto Adige", in german called "Südtirol". Südtirol is translated South Tyrol. Now the official name of the region is "Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol". "Trentino" is not possible to translate, it's the same. I proposed to move the different categories-names of this region in a new category called "Trentino-Alto Adige/South Tyrol". Foroa correctly opposed, because this is not the official name. Dall'Orto say that this name doesn't exist. That is correct: we cannot translate the half of a name and the other half not ! So I changed my opinion. The only possible way is to support the official name: "Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol".

I hope that you are not more so confused about the version that I support. Best regards --DenghiùComm (talk) 18:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

ah good :-) "Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol" is also in my view the only solution to the region. (on the english wiki there was a huge fight last year if the name shouldn't be: "Trentino-Südtirol" or "Trentino-Alto Adige" or "Trentino-South Tyrol" or "Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol" or "Trentino-Alto Adige/South Tyrol" or... it was a waste of everybody's time) therefore I am happy that we can leave the Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol category where it is (and also at the name given to the region in the Italian constitution). --Noclador (talk) 19:20, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Back to the basics[edit]

Happy to see some progress. Personally, I think that we have to find an overall agreement about all the names (and the category structrure which is more misleading than helping).

Here a first shot to start the discussion. Before getting in this debate, I never heard about South Tyrol (but I knew the Dolomites and Südtirol), and saw it just like somewhere a corner of Tyrol like you have Northern Alsace, South of France, ... I checked the Encyclopedia Brittanica and Encarta, and there, South Tyrol is not known neither.

So first comment: there seems to be no official English name for Südtirol, why fabricating one ? Personally, I am against exonyms, unless they are extremely popular and have an important place in history (or to avoid local language problems such as the English Brussels to avoid the Brussel/Bruxelles debate). Remembering a local names is already difficult, remembering an additional invent name is even more difficult.

The purpose of Commons is to help people find their way into commons, so in this case, I would say that 50 % of the visitors/worker are locals (say 70 % German speaking), 35 % Italians and 15 % from allover the world. The more different names you use, the less people will find their way. To me, it is obvious that there have been an attempt to avoid any possible reference that might refer to Italy. While this might be good for the separatist image building, the consequence is that, to some extent unconsciously, Italian speakers will tend to stay away from that as they will not find themselves at home. I am sure that many commons contributors will shy away from this area as the naming rules are very artificial, so chances on troubles are real.

And finally, a basic question; why is it ridiculous to call this province a province ? You want to market it as a region in a region ? Commons is no marketing tool, and even so, marketing would use a consistent naming. --Foroa (talk) 21:27, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

no clue whatsoever... "why fabricating one": maybe because the province has taken the decision to use only the term "South Tyrol" in English: [1], [2], and to market tourism under "South Tyrol" [3], [4], maybe because the name "South Tyrol" is centuries old [5], is used in the New York Times [6], and not just today but also in 1984, 1946, 1946, 1919, 1915, 1878, 1877. a) the official name in English as decided by the provincial goverment is "South Tyrol" b) "South Tyrol" is no fabrication (unlike Alto Adige, which actually is a fabrication) c) invented name??? lol d) "separatist image building" you are mistaken - since two years we have a campaign on the English wiki to exterminate all German names, especially the term Südtirol, from all wiki pages! (typical example: [7] or this discussion: [8] (can the Südtiroler Pfadfinderschaft stay under its name or must it be the Province of Bolzano Scout Association...)) e) not enough this category discussions have gone on the English wiki for years and have always all been rejected: i.e. Category:South Tyrol: August 2007: [9], November 2007: [10], February 2008: [11], May 2008: [12], September 2008: [13], the last nomination was January 2009: [14] - always rejected, because of the facts: oldest name in use in English: "South Tyrol", most common used name in English "South Tyrol", official name in English "South Tyrol". f) and as you rightly pointed out: let us use consistent naming: "South Tyrol" therefore is name and EOD. --Noclador (talk) 05:31, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
All this is up to you. Its kind of comic as many "reference" sites carry the name Südtirol one way on another. When looking into the categories mentioned in this discussionl, you can see that it is a mess and several partly filled parallel categories do exist as on commons. Anyway, Commons is not about marketing, and redundant categories don't help marketing either. My personal priority is that people that work most in the category, mostly the locals, feel at home. I feel that a tourist that visits the area should find his way, so you don't help the tourist by fabricating an English translation that have no meaning when coming physically to the area. I can tell you hilarious stories about that in Belgium where we have three official languages and people don't find their way because some cities are indicated in three different languages depending on the area you are. Good luck to find your way if you don't know the three names.
You might have noticed that with improved international sensitivity, exonyms are less and less used and most of them will eventually disappear if they can be read by western people (extended roman alphabet). For example, Birma and Bombay don't really exist here anymore. I can safely predict that within a number of years, Cologne will become Köln again (Koeln is disappearing too) and later on (10/15 years maybe), even Florence will become Firenze again. --Foroa (talk) 06:05, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually all categories were once South Tyrol on the English wiki until 2 people (and a plethora of socks and IPs from Virgina, USA) decided that the categories need renaming - so they put up endless discussions and when they did not get the result they wanted, they created various Bolzano, Province of Bolzano, Alto Adige, Province of Alto Adige and added places to them (suddenly there were 4-5 categories in for the province in each article) and then they requested anew to have the categories with South Tyrol to be renamed/deleted; and when this was rejected (after all South Tyrol is the name under which the province is known in English), they started to empty the South Tyrol categories and then nominate them for deletion as empty categories... and were again defeated,... in short this mess we owe to just one person (and his socks). As for your claim of "fabricating an English translation hat have no meaning when coming physically to the area" a) nobody is fabricating anything (as I pointed out x-times to you South Tyrol is as valid as Rome or Milan) and b) when you come to South Tyrol everyone knows what South Tyrol is. As for the future: if exonyms will disappear then soon only the German names will remain in South Tyrol (actually the local Italians are already more and more using the German names). To sum it all up once more: can we end this superfluous discussion now? We had it at least 5 times before and the outcome was always "Keep at South Tyrol". You're the only one that insists on a change and in the end this motion will be defeated. Therefore I suggest to close this discussion now and we go back to work (I rather expand the history section of the en:Carabinieri a bit more tonight :-) --Noclador (talk) 18:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, all arguments are now on the table, no sense to discuss the issue South Tyrol/Südtirol further without more involved habitants of the region and Italy. I agree to disagree. Nevertheless, for consistency, it must be indicated as a province, and this is not a discutable point. --Foroa (talk) 15:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
"agree to disagree" usually implies that both sides refrain from changes to the status quo and not that one unilaterally forces his position through! --Noclador (talk) 17:06, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Next try[edit]

See Category talk:Province of South Tyrol. --Foroa (talk) 09:57, 27 September 2012 (UTC)