From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archived discussions

Formatting and language conventions

For articles about Italy, please use the 24-hour clock to show times, e.g. 09:00-12:00 and 18:00-00:00.

Please show prices in this format: €100, and not 100 €, or EUR 100.

Please use British spelling.

Most crime is committed by immigrants?[edit]

Such is the claim in this guide. Such claims in other countries (including the US and Malaysia, where studies have found the crime rate of illegal aliens is lower than that of the general population) almost always seem to be bullshit, and I seriously doubt this one is any more accurate; I believe this is a claim of anti-immigrant folks from Italy. Prove me wrong by citing reliable statistics, or I will feel impelled to edit the claims. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:42, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a trail that might lead to a reliable source of evidence: an article here from an Italian newspaper, which quotes a guide done with the support of the Italian government; the guide says that according to the Ministero dell'Interno 80% of crimes are committed by illegal aliens. I must say that this is perfectly consistent with my personal experience as a citizen of Rome; all street crimes I ever hear about in my daily life are always committed by immigrants; all the street criminals I ever saw or heard about were immigrants. By the way it's in Wikipedia that you must cite sources; as far as I can tell you must not do so in Wikivoyage. 04:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


I'm not sure why the previous banner was changed? I like it more than the current one. Globe-trotter (talk) 00:39, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you? I thought it was a little bit generic. To my mind it wouldn't have looked out of place in France, Germany, Switzerland or Austria. I'm not claiming the new one's perfect (it ain't), but I think it's preferable. Of course this is all rather subjective and very much down to personal taste. --Nick talk 00:45, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with both of you. As a photo, I think the previous banner was better, but this one shows a more typical Italian view. The background is quite hazy, though, so I think a better banner is possible. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:47, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ikan Kekek stole my fire: #1 higher quality, #2 better subject. A panoramic view over Florence immediately came to my mind for an ideal subject. Or maybe a stylish shot of Roman or Renaissance artwork instead? --Peter Talk 00:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with both Ikan Kekek and Peter above. Sorry if my first comment sounded a tad grumpy - it's 2AM here and I've just spent the latter couple of hours looking for banners (not for Italy though). :) I'll have a look and see what else I can find. --Nick talk 00:55, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Ok, here are a few I found - any thoughts? --Nick talk 01:28, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of these, I think Florence wins! --Peter Talk 01:54, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tuscan fields
A leafy view of Rome
A view across beautiful Florence
The view of Florence is beautiful. I vote for that one. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All of these banners are quite blurry, unfortunately. I think maybe you should save them with a higher file size. Globe-trotter (talk) 02:30, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I like all three, but for Italy it would actually be the best to show some countryside rather than elevate one city over the others, especially with their landmarks so easily discernible. The boucolic banner is alrighty with me. PrinceGloria (talk) 06:26, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That one has some color issues. Also, it just looks like Maryland to me :P --Peter Talk 08:16, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think the consensus seems to be pointing towards Florence, so we'll give that one a go for the moment. I find banners tend to look quite different in situ. --Nick talk 10:27, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


The map used in this article needs amended boundaries between Abruzzo and Molise regions. Regards. --Ciaurlec (talk) 13:24, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Caffe americano[edit]

The page describes this drink as espresso with "much more water and is served in a cappuccino cup. It is more like an American breakfast coffee but the quantity is still far less than you would get in the States." This sounds a little different from what it is understood to be in the U.S., where it's basically an espresso shot (or two) with enough hot water added to fill out a typical coffee mug. And it's usually not a breakfast drink. Shouldn't we make this clearer? The WP article adds that "In Italy caffè americano could mean either espresso with hot water or filtered coffee (caffè all'americana)." Seems like we need that distinction here. Daniel Case (talk) 04:26, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

toll free numbers from another country[edit]

I assume if you call a 800 number from abroad there will be a charge. Question is what prefix is used, is it simply +39 800 xxxxx? --Traveler100 (talk) 16:28, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Caffè sospeso[edit]

Swept in from the pub

I just learned about the w:Caffè sospeso tradition in Italy, and I am hearing that it happens in some other places, too. I see nothing in Wikivoyage about this. Does anyone know anything about it? It seems like a fun thing, and if it's common, then perhaps we should explain (for the benefit of flat-broke student travelers as well as for people who think it'd be fun to buy an extra). WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:54, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Buonasera! This is the first I have ever heard of it, but I see no reason for a sentence or two not to be included in the drink section of the relevant destination articles, whether it be at a national (is this common throughout Italy?) or more regional level. I wouldn't talk about it in every single place in the world where a cup of coffee has ever been donated (leave that, and the history lecture, to Wikipedia), just where it's a frequently practised part of the local culture. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:26, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I thought this was a thing already in the United States? I believe it is called "paying it forward", although not just for coffee... --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to be a Neapolitan thing, but sort of everywhere. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:42, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
How would Italian baristas react to foreign tourists, no matter how relatively poor (but still able to travel there), asking for a caffe sospeso? Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:38, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also vice-versa, how would a barista react to someone outside of the community offering one? (just curious) Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:35, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think offering is never an issue; it's perfectly acceptable for anyone to order and pay for one. The reality in most cities is, of course, that there's no community in the sense of people knowing everyone anyway. The whole point of the suspended coffees is that it's relatively anonymous. Travellers asking for one is another matter entirely though, and I don't think we should encourage it, even when most owners wouldn't know they're dealing with a traveller. I'd guess that many would consider it a form of abuse, if they found out - and that's not helpful for the concept. I've included the info occasionally in listings for coffee shops that have this option. We could mention it in the drink-section of our Naples article, if that's where it comes from. For the rest, I'd say it simply belongs in listings for participating establishments. The concept became relatively well-known in the Netherlands for a couple of years, but it seems to be dying out a bit. JuliasTravels (talk) 14:38, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I like your approach, Julias. It'd be good to send the interested traveler to a place that does this as a matter of routine. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:34, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Other destinations"[edit]

We already mention Pompeii and Herculaneum, so should we mention Vesuvius also? How about Mount Etna instead, or perhaps the Aeolian Islands or some other island group?

Also, Taormina is described as a "hillside town" and "Other destinations" are not supposed to be towns. So should we remove Taormina, and if so, what would be the most attractive replacement? Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:28, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New page banner[edit]

Current banner (Florence)
Proposed banner (Forum Romanum)

Made a new banner for Italy. What do you think? /Yvwv (talk) 21:23, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The current banner is prettier and more alive, in my opinion. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Again, thanks for your efforts Yvwv, but I concur with Ikan. The current banner is nicer. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:44, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Could it be used for Rome (province)? The current banner has poor quality. /Yvwv (talk) 13:11, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3 region levels. Why?[edit]

What is actually the point of having three region levels for Italy? I just had a look at Verona, and all 3 region levels are barely filled with information.

Wouldn't it be more useful for travellers to have less stubs and more concentrated information, instead of getting lost in a labyrinth of bureaucratic hierarchy?

I reckon the intermediate level, in this case Veneto, would be sufficient to make Italy a more useful country on WV.

Cheers, Ceever (talk) 21:35, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Guide status[edit]

Contrary to my edit summary, the articles lower down the hierarchy needn't be guide status or better, but they do have to be usable. Italy's top-level regions are mostly outlines, so it'll be quite some time before the status of this article can be upgraded. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:53, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Too many featured destinations around Naples?[edit]

Certainly Metropolitan Naples stands out as a great region for tourists. But shall Wikivoyage promote as many as six destinations from that region in this article? Are there no interesting non-city destinations in Central or Southeastern Italy? /Yvwv (talk) 03:13, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They're great destinations, but that said, the Villa d'Este in Tivoli could be an "Other destination". I guess that could be substituted for Vesuvius, which you can see from several of the other destinations already on that list and, of course, Naples in the Cities list. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:06, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is Movimento Cinque Stelle "left wing"?[edit]

this edit claims that M5S is "left wing", however I would question this as w:economic populism has never been contradictory per se with a right wing position and they hold some traditionally right wing views such as anti-EU, anti-"elites" and vague attacks on "the system" that - yeah, Godwin - were not unheard of by fascist parties.... The English language Wikipedia Article for one does not assign them a position in the left-right paradigm... Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:00, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would not describe them as left-wing. Populist, yes, but their program is a mixed bag (or random assortment) of anti-establishment policies. Ground Zero (talk) 21:07, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If the term hadn't been sustainably "burned" by who used it, you could call them w:Third position Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:13, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That said, environmenmentalism and universal basic income are most certainly left wing policies. But I guess it's also true that they have some right wing policies like anti-immigration. I guess the main point I was trying to get at was the there is now an alliance by two very different but populist parties that have formed a populist coalition. I don't know if that's a good analogy, but in the hypothetical situation that Donald Trump's faction and Bernie Sanders' faction united to form a populist coalition, would that be something similar to this? The dog2 (talk) 01:43, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It would be exactly the same thing if, instead of Bernie Sanders standing for a decidedly left-wing platform, instead stood for a grab-bag of populist policies from the left, right, centre, and dark corners of the interwebs. Then it would be exactly like the Italian situation. Ground Zero (talk) 02:22, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, go ahead and change the description to something you feel is more appropriate. The dog2 (talk) 04:23, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Phone number format[edit]

I thought it would be better to discuss issues related to this edit here. If you dial internationally to Italy, not only do you need to use the prefix 39, but you also must leave off the first 0 in each phone number. So I think the convention is to exclude it here, with the understanding that you have to add it if you are within Italy. I fear this does a disservice to travelers and would propose a +39 (0) and then the rest of the number format. Your thoughts? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:01, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am fairly neutral on this issue, but note that the "zero rule" as you describe it, applies to France and the UK too (and probably other countries), so if this is supported by a couple of users and not opposed, it ought to be discussed in the pub before being adopted.
Also note that for EU citizens using their own device on roaming, the situation can be complicated. For example, my phone contract treats any use elsewhere in the EU the same as at home; calls and data usage cost the same, but equally I have to use the international code to call other numbers in the same country.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:58, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I don't care what format we use, as long as it's a format that could actually be called from somewhere. The prefix with the first 0, to my knowledge, can't be called from anywhere. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:14, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Italy is different from other countries as far as removing the zero from the number. See w:Telephone numbers in Italy#Trunk code removal --Traveler100 (talk) 07:42, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Is also stated at Italy#Telephone (4th paragraph). --Traveler100 (talk) 07:45, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see! The last time I was in Italy was 1998, so that's when the change was made! Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:58, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing sentence[edit]

The last phrase in this sentence at the end of "From independent city states to unification" is confusing and requires more explanation if we decide not to excise it:

The Pope lost much of his influence, with his political authority now being confined to the Vatican City, itself a result of a political compromise between the Pope and Benito Mussolini in the 1920s.

Also, we need to decide whether to use capitals - the Pope or the pope? Right now, the title is mostly in lowercase but sometimes not. I think in most cases, we use lowercase for titles like "president" on Wikivoyage, but I don't care which we choose. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:30, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The Pope" (that is being referred to, as opposed to the various other popes throughout history) is a proper noun, as far as I am concerned.
The sentence could be split into two, i.e. "...confined to the Vatican City. This was a result of a political compromise..." but I don't know enough about the history to determine whether that would be accurate.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:48, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're right in hesitating in that the Vatican City as a political entity was a result of the compromise, but so, too, was the Papacy's confinement there. You could probably parse the sentence either way and still be correct. We could elaborate, but that strikes me as unnecessary detail. ARR8 (talk) 21:36, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So should we just delete the last phrase in that sentence? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:13, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox on time, currency, and spelling[edit]

Per Wikivoyage_talk:Time_and_date_formats#Implementing, I added an Infobox on time, currency, and spelling of Italy articles to this country-level Talk page. I chose 24-hour time, currency of "€24", and British spelling. If there is discussion about whether other choices for time, currency, and spelling would be better, I offer this as a place for that discussion. JimDeLaHunt (talk) 13:25, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dead Links[edit]

I have a question. Should we delete any dead links and replace them with better ones? CatDog1234539 (talk) 13:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, assuming that the links are for the same business or institution (if not, explain what you're thinking of). When you do that, just note in your edit summary that you replaced a dead link with one that works. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:55, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek:Ok, I'll find all dead link needing to be replaced. CatDog1234539 (talk) 16:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is a dead link for Eurolines in the By Bus section. CatDog1234539 (talk) 16:21, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you find an equivalent working link, then it is easy, just change to the working one. Other cases are more convoluted. If what you find is at, Facebook, Tripadvisor, or some other site not belonging to the individual business, then we might want to search some more. Sometimes a dead link means the company is out of business, and the links you find just haven't been updated to that reality. If the business really is closed (and hasn't just closed their web page) we probably want to remove the listing, not only the link – but sometimes the landlord will get another company to continue the business, and most info will stay the same (this is e.g. the case with most museum cafés over here). –LPfi (talk) 16:52, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have fixed the dead link and used a new one, so the link should work now. CatDog1234539 (talk) 20:35, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It didn't work, but it does now.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 23:12, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete provinces[edit]

For Emilia-Romagna in 2016 it was intended to abolish the "province" pages. For whatever reason that wasn't taken forward so I'm proposing to resume. A glance around the country reveals many similar hollow pages, but that's not the criterion - if there's info relevant at "province" level it should be added, but if the entity is redundant / obsolete then prospective content belongs on the relevant city pages. Bologna is a good example, the province was abolished in 2015 and the area became a metropolis. Are there any views on the value of province pages across Italy? Grahamsands (talk) 13:24, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, Bologna Metropolitan City has the same boundaries as the former Bologna Province, and the same for the other metropolitan cities. These are therefore analogous to the similarly obsolete metropolitan counties in England, in that they're relatively large regions surrounding a big city, but still containing separate towns and areas of countryside etc. Obviously, any empty skeleton like Bologna (province) should be redirected, but if any other former provinces have viable articles with cities and/or parks under them, I'd suggest keeping them, either at the same location or moved to X (metropolitan city), which would nonetheless still be a region article.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:55, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, change of plan! There were just a handful of outlying locations around Bologna Metropolis / Province, which I've tucked into Bologna > See > Further out. But that city is the exception. The other provinces of E-R at first glance looked hollow but on WV / IT had many constituent towns of usabile grade, so the task is to translate and populate WV / EN - a straightforward but hefty piece of work. Probably the 2016 contributors baulked at this, and tiptoed away without posting a note, so I've gone round in the same circle. I'll try to tidy the regional and provincial pages to make them more transparent, post lots of "Please translate" stickers, and make a general shout for more input, as I've just done. Grahamsands (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]