Talk:Albiano

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move. JPG-GR (talk) 03:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move?:
- Albiano (TN) → Albiano — (Discuss) — Heh, complete coincidence that I came here at the same time as the previous Italy ones. This one's a bit different, as the most notable Albiano (a full comune) was "pushed" off Albiano by a minor village in Tuscany. I've now merged the Tuscan one into the appropriate comune article, so we just need to move Albiano (TN) to Albiano like it.wiki and others. FlagSteward (talk) 16:40, 31 May 2008 (UTC) — FlagSteward (talk) 16:40, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Or move Albiano (TN) to Albiano (Trento) and make Albiano into a disambig page between Albiano (Trento) and Albiano d'Ivrea and Albiano, Tuscany? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - That way gives you an unnecessarily disambiguated title (Trento) and given that the Tuscan one is now just a redirect, I don't think we need to disambiguate. All the other wikipedias have the Trento one at plain Albiano; IMO if the Italians don't feel the need to disambiguate then nor do we. FlagSteward (talk) 13:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Target if a dab tag is needed should be Albiano, Trento - comma, not brackets. Otherwise Albiano as elsewhere. 81.110.106.169 (talk) 18:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are quite a few places in Italy called Albiano—especially in Tuscany, as it happens—and I have made a dab page for them at Albiano (disambiguation). I’ve redirected Albiano, Tuscany to the dab page, as we cannot guess which Tuscan Albiano a reader will have in mind, and have made an equivalent new redirect at Albiano (Barga). I hope none of that was too bold.

Of the various places called Albiano, three seem to be the most significant: Albiano (TN), Albiano d'Ivrea and it:Albiano di Magra (a former commune in Lunigiana). Of these, two are already disambiguated in their official titles. The dab page, even between these three, was still required since readers may well have come across one of them simply as ‘Albiano’. But I see no reason why Albiano (TN) should not be moved to Albiano, as long as the hat-note reference to the dab page is retained. (On the other hand, I don’t see any great problem with letting things stand as they are, with Albiano redirecting to Albiano (TN) rather than to Albiano (disambiguation).)

I would oppose a move to Albiano (Trento) or Albiano, Trento: such a title would be capable of being actually misleading; I, for one, would interpret it as meaning that this Albiano was one of the many frazioni, or other local centres, that fall within the commune of Trento. The current disambiguation format may be puzzling for readers not yet up in things Italian, but at least it does not mislead. Also it is in accord with WP:NC:CITY#Italy. Not all editors agree with that naming convention, but since it has remained unchanged for years, and since the sporadic discussions which have taken place during that time have never come to another consensus, I think it is best to follow it.

—Ian Spackman (talk) 09:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.