User talk:Panairjdde
|
|
Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need any questions answered about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or drop me a line. BTW, nice work updating the Football World Cup 2002 article. Cheers! --maveric149
| Contents |
Ship prefix
On Talk:Ship prefix you wrote:
- The Italian Regia Marina adopted the 'R.N.' (Regia Nave) prefix for its ships, and 'R.S.' (Regio Sottomarino) for its submarines. Should this prefixes be included in the table? Any objections? As an example, see the page for the RN Leonardo da Vinci (http://xoomer.virgilio.it/bk/MuseoLaSpezia/RN%20Leonardo%20da%20Vinci/) in La Spezia. --Panairjdde 13:38, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Do you have an official reference that confirms this? I note that the Marina Militare's own database of Italian ships [1] (http://www.marina.difesa.it/storia/Almanacco/Navi000.htm) contains no ship prefixes. Gdr 01:03, 2004 Dec 16 (UTC)
The current formal prefix in "Nave" (Ship), e.g. Nave Garibaldi (the aircraft carrier). Up to the end of the Monarchy, the prefix was "Regia Nave", as correctly stated. This prefix can change if referring to the ship's category, e.g. Regio Cacciatorpediniere (destroyer), Regio Incrociatore (Cruiser) and so on. BTW, I am the author of the referred picture, and it can freely used as far as the source is referred. (Stefano Sappino)
Image sources
I see you're uploading some great ship imagery, but there is no mention of where they're from or their copyright status. Look at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags to see the standard options for copyright tagging; if you don't know, use "unverified" or some such. Stan 15:53, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- You are right. They are all from the Italian Navy web site, and are copyrighted but of free use. Sometimes I forget to add the tag, I'm trying to put it back in all the pages.--Panairjdde 16:14, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Italy national team
Hmmm, valid point. I guess they don't consider the league qualifying? Weird... It can go either way, I guess. Your choice. --Dryazan 16:16, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Squadra Azzurra
Well, I grew up in Brazil hearing this was the traditional nickname of the Italian national team (as the Uruguayan one was known as [i]Celeste Olímpica[/i], our own Brazilian team was [i]Canarinho[/i] and such). Maybe this is a Brazilian view which is not founded in actual practice in Italy, so I might be wrong. I did a perfunctory Google for the sentence, though, and found plenty of ocurrences, mostly in Italian, some in French or Portuguese. Not all of them related to football (soccer), but as far as I could check they were all or almost all sports related. It might be a matter of local preference; some people prefer referring to the players ([i]Azzurri[/i]) while other prefer to mention the team directly. Generally speaking, though, in Latin countries the standard naming practice for teams is to refer to the team, not the players. For instance, the Brazilian "Corinthians" football team is always referred to in the singular, despite being named after a British team -- which would be referred to in the plural. So, you might refer to [i]the Azzurra[/i] (the usual practice here in Brazil) as well as [i]the Azzurri[/i], depending on your personal preferences. MCBastos 15:24, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Categorization
Hello Panairjdde.
Currently we have something that looks a bit like this:
- Italian Navy
- Regia Marina
- Regia Marina ships
- Regia Marina cruisers
- Condottieri class cruisers
- Regia Marina cruisers
- Regia Marina ships
- Regia Marina
Because Condottieri class cruiser is already part of the category Condottieri class cruisers it is encouraged not to list the article again on any of the parent/super categories to prevent cluttering and ambiguity. Otherwise, it could applicably go on ALL of its parents. Please refer to the Subcategorization guide for more information. Oberiko 17:37, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks, nice work on the new categorization BTW. Oberiko 19:24, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Italian Social Republic
The image that you just removed was a very interesting one that illustrated an intereting vignette of life in the ISR. Unless there is a copyvio issue, why not include both that image and the flag image that you put in? Kevintoronto 15:08, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Putting a link as you suggested helps, but something is not clear to me: the article to which you linked does not mention the ISR, except in the caption to the image. What was that brigade's role in the ISR? (I am not an expert in Italian history.) Thanks. Kevintoronto 15:46, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Italian Motto
the motto was proposed by Mazzini and later adopted by Garibaldean's Army. It has simply never been officialised by Italian governement due to incomprensions(hate?) between Cavour and Garibaldi.
- the end result is that it is not Italian motto, but only Mazzini's and Garibaldi's --Panairjdde 09:41, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
L/R
Why this tight-assed rigidity about where images are supposed to be placed? Its true, many images are better suited to the right side, but some -- like upper body portraits -- look great on the left, which is were I place many of them, at least in the biographical articles I create (what others do is their choice). Aside from their intrinsic value, images are also useful to break up the visual layout of the page, and in that respect a certain randomness is all the more welcome, as much as stylistic consistency is important in other ways. I will proably revert you in this one particular case, but it is not like I think something this trivial is worth getting into an edit war over. Ciao. -- Viajero 17:47, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Garibaldi
Hi,
I saw the changes you made to Giuseppe Garibaldi. Many of the stylistic changes you made to the latter part of the article are good, but don't bother; it's in the process of being rewritten (check the edit history). However, I'm quite puzzled by some of your edits. I'm really hesitant to challenge you on this, because you're Italian and I'm not, but I'd rather get this straightened out than let factual errors into the wiki.
You changed sites of Garibaldi's progress up the Calabrian peninsula from 'Cosenza' and 'Eboli' to 'Cadenza' and 'Ebola'. According to the relevant article, Cosenza is indeed a town in Calabria. I'm not sure what cadenza means, but I can't imagine that there would be a town by that name, and the wiki lists none such. Likewise Ebola. Given this, I really have no choice but to suspect you of vandalism. I've watchlisted your talk page; you may reply right here. --Smack (talk) 04:54, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
John of Taranto
Hi, Wikipedia policy is to use the name most commonly known to English speakers. I've moved this article back. RickK 09:20, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
It appears you are right. I apologize. I'll change it back. RickK 09:27, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
You weren't too harsh, it wasn't a problem. :) RickK 09:38, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
This sort of discussion should be made in the pertinent discussion page of the article itself. Here, and spread somewhere, it fails to reach others, and others were not easily able to join that discussion. Please put your arguments on the page I referred, it is Talk:Giovanni Antonio del Balzo Orsini. My opinion, resons menmtioned there, is that it should be "John of...", already because of the consistency of Wikipedia article titling. 62.78.106.188 14:02, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Roman legions
What a nice work youve been doing with the legions! muriel@pt 15:46, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
- Thank you, but, to tell the truth, I added little content, I only re-organized a little.--Panairjdde 15:50, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
Please do not convert names into Italian up to the point of ridicule
I happened to see that you made some changes, leaving a name as "Caterina of Taranto". And there seems to be other cases too. Of course that is ridiculous italianization. Against the English language, indeed. At least, it should be left such that it is not against the English language, i.e Catherine of Taranto (I now believe that name form Taranto is allowed in today English - but certainly not Caterina). 62.78.106.188 14:06, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- The current president of the French Republic is Jacques Chirac. I do not think you consider "ridiculous [frenchization]. Against the English language, indeed." calling him Jacques instead of James.--Panairjdde 06:20, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
That example shows how badly you understand. Firstly, the ridiculity would be if you call him for example Jacques of Chirac. As you did with Caterina of Taranto. Secondly, currently living persons are treated differently than persons of history. Thus, you chose (deliberately?) an example without any meaning in the original question. For example, Juan Carlos I of Spain, not necessarily John Charles I of Spain. Thirdly, feudal lords are usually treated similarly with historical royalty, whereas persons who were civil servants, are not. Thus, we could have French finance minister Jacques Necker, but we have Philip, Duke of Orleans, Grand Duke Francis of Tuscany, Catherine Medici (queen of France), as well as James, Prince of Morea. Please read carefully those Wikipedia standards that deal with names and historical persons. 62.78.104.96 05:51, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- This isn't quite as black-and-white as you try to make it out. Some names are commonly converted, e.g., fr Jean->John, because "Jean" is also a valid English name. But sometimes the conversion is inconsistent; you see things like "John de Brienne" where only the personal name is converted. And some foreign names are largely accepted in English: one might or might not translate "Giovanni" into "John", as Giovanni is unambiguous in an English context. In any case, a quick perusal of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) reveals the dictum "use the most common form of the name used in English if none of the rules cover a specific problem". Since no one ever appears to have used either "Catherine of Taranto" or "Caterina of Taranto" to describe this individual, I personally would favor moving it to "Caterina del Balzo Orsini", but I don't imagine I'll get a warm reception... Choess 06:58, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)
The "warm" welcome depends very much whether she was a lowly noblewoman without any significance outside her local community, in which case she could be equivalent to those civil servants etc (and her insignificance will be duly noted e.g by a paragraph in her article), or if she was a feudal princess, in which case she should be under her "international" name, and redirs take care of all national and other variants of the name. 62.78.104.14 17:13, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Ok, added.--Panairjdde 12:18, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Gioachino Rossini
Well I know your edits, and you're almost always right; but not on this one. Much to my surprise, since I had the same reaction, and nearly made the change too; but — having been caught out a few times — checked: and sure nuff, Gioachino (one C) is in fact the absolutely proper form. Mind you, Gioacchino with 2 C's is the standard form for the first name, so even among Italians there's a strong tendency to back-form Rossini's name with the others; but strict accuracy does require Gioachino. Best, Bill 10:30, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I edited those pages because I thought it was a typo of some sort (there were two Giacchino as well); It is also true that the name, in its proper Italian form is Gioacchino, and I am Italian. That said I am no Rossini expert, so if you are sure he was Gioachino, please, feel free to revert my edits.--Panairjdde 10:34, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I noticed just now that you are the webmaster of LacusCurtius: great site, very useful!--Panairjdde 10:47, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Grazie amico — e anche un po' sul centro dell'Italia, innanzittutto l'Umbria (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Gazetteer/Places/Europe/Italy/Umbria/map.html). Bé nemmeno io non sono esperto in Rossineria, e perciň volevo cambiarlo come hai fatto tu, in Gioacchino. Invece, sulla Wiki italiana trovo sempre Gioachino, anche con reindirizzamento (http://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gioacchino_Rossini&redirect=no); senza discussione. In Rete, per quanto vale!, 110 mila "C", 157 mila "CC". Nel complessivo, visto che "CC" fa norma per il nome non-rossiniano, 110/267 + il parere della Wiki Italiana mi sembra conclusivo???? Ho fatto alcune altre ricerche, senza risultato; nella mia biblioteca a casa, l'unica fonte autorevole sull'argomento, Oxford Companion to Music, dŕ CC; la Rossini Festival (http://www.rossinioperafestival.it/) scrive C. Bisognerebbe trovare una firma autografa. Cmq, non faccio nulla: ti rilancio la palla.... Cordialmente, Bill 13:54, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Image alignment
There is no need to be dogmatic about the alignment of images. See Formatting pages on User:Wetman. -- Viajero | Talk 21:44, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)