Jump to content

Talk:Gaetano Bresci

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleGaetano Bresci has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 1, 2023Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 9, 2023.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that before assassinating Umberto I of Italy, Gaetano Bresci spent most of the day eating ice cream?
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 29, 2006, November 10, 2019, July 29, 2020, and July 29, 2023.


The first

[edit]

"the first person to kill a European monarch (without toppling the monarchy) and not be executed" is sourced and all ok that way, but it is also obviously false as stated. More correctly, Bresci may be the first assassin of royalty to escape execution due to abolishment of capital punishment, and that is probably what the source intended. // 81.233.102.222 (talk) 11:12, 13 January 2011 (UTC) (OlofE)[reply]

trial and death

[edit]

(from France) the statement that "Biographer Arrigo Petacco described the circumstances of Bresci's death as mysterious" does not go far enough : these circumstances were... always seen as mysterious. Petacco's book L'anarchico che venne dall'America (Mondadori, 1969) put an end once for all to the official version -suicide. Luc Nemeth 194.214.199.130 (talk) 14:53, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

republicans

[edit]

Is there a source for the claim that he is still considered a hero by many 'republicans'? For I'm Italian and it is not clear to me who these "republicans" are supposed to be. I would be surprised if they were the members or supporters of the Italian Republican Party which is very small and rather conservative. Nicola carraro (talk) 10:26, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gaetano Bresci. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 02:11, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Gaetano Bresci/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mujinga (talk · contribs) 16:21, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Prose

[edit]
  • It was faster to cut out words such as meanwhile and but as i read through the article, happy to discuss any changes you don't like
  • slight overlinking, i don't think New York, United States or Italy need wikilinking
  • lead ok, could be expanded a bit eg another sentence or two on the assassination and arrest. oh and legacy deserves a sentence or two as well.
    another sentence or two please Mujinga (talk) 15:03, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Expanded. -- Grnrchst (talk) 08:54, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • anarchism could linked on first mention in lead and body
  • "Bresci was granted amnesty in 1896 and returned to Italy" - returned to the mainland? becuase lampedusa is still italy
  • this early life section can be pulled together into one paragraph
  • After receiving news of the Bava Beccaris massacre, Bresci swore revenge against the "murderer king" Umberto I of Italy.[18] - the Bava Beccaris massacre could be summarised so we know why he is so angry. and why is murderer king in quote marks? who said it?
nice summary. maybe say "Bresci swore revenge against Umberto I, who he called "murderer king"" or similar? Mujinga (talk) 15:06, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. -- Grnrchst (talk) 07:15, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • and knew of Bresci as a "dangerous anarchist" - is this a direct quote?
  • Yes it's a direct quote. From the source (Pernicone & Ottanelli 2018, p. 147):

    the local police chief did not take alarm even though Bresci was listed in local police records as a “dangerous anarchist.”

    How should I clarify this? --Grnrchst (talk) 11:11, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
the records said he was a "dangerous anarchist"? Mujinga (talk) 15:07, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They cited the state archive of Palermo, so I guess so? --Grnrchst (talk) 16:00, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
sorry i wasn't clear, i meant hoiw do you clarify this? how about saying "the records said he was a "dangerous anarchist"" or similar Mujinga (talk) 08:10, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah ok, got it. Think I've clarified that now. -- Grnrchst (talk) 12:17, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • sidecomment - I've been to that Royal Villa it's a huge palace! nice gardens
  • sidecomment - "He spent most of the day walking around town and eating ice cream" - a cool cucumber
  • "That evening at 21:30, Umberto began on his largely-unguarded route to the stadium" reads a bit strange (largely-unguarded?) can you rephrase?
  • within three meters of the king's car - article is using US-eng so would be worth marking as such
MOS:RETAIN advises sticking with the type used in the first post-stub version so here I think that's US Mujinga (talk) 14:57, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's now using American English. -- Grnrchst (talk) 16:04, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "but was arrested by Andrea Braggio" - who is that?
great that works Mujinga (talk) 14:57, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "with many contesting whether his death was truly a suicide" - many who?
  • I appreciate that "many" here is weasel wordy, so I figured it would be worth quoting the sources on this one. Goyens 2017, p. 93:

    Convicted to life in prison (Italy did not have capital punishment), Bresci died the next year in jail, reportedly under suspicious circumstances.

    Kemp 2018, p. 62:

    Whether Bresci acted alone in both the assassination of Umberto and his own death is contested to this day. The likelihood is that given italian jurisprudence during this period, and the severity of the offense for which he was convicted, prison guards may well have been responsible for his demise.

    Levy 2007, pp. 214-215:

    Was Bresci murdered in prison? [...] Bresci was found dead, hanging from a cell window by a towel, even though he was under constant surveillance. There was a four-day gap between the death and the actual autopsy, and it had been argued that the man in charge of the Acciarito affair and soon after appointed as the super-intendent of Italian prisons, had carried out a “wet job” on Bresci. Case unsolved.

    How can I more clearly attribute this? --Grnrchst (talk) 12:12, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the references. I suppose they are historians, so you could say something like "The circumstances of Bresci's death aroused suspicion, with historians suggesting he was murdered". You could also add a footnote if you wanted to, don't think it's necessary. Maybe it's worth adding a bit more on contemporary new reports celebrating "justice" being served Mujinga (talk) 15:01, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Rewritten. -- Grnrchst (talk) 16:08, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • " the socialist activist Benito Mussolini praised Bresci" - suggest "the future dictator Benito Mussolini" or similar
I don't have access to the source, what does it say? The sentence currently reads "On the anniversary of the assassination, the socialist activist Benito Mussolini praised Bresci in the pages of Lotta di Classe" - are we talking one year anniversary then? "Socialist activist Benito Mussolini" just reads a bit like "artist Adolf Hitler" to me .. it depends on when the praise was made I suppose, in a way Mussolini is notable enough to need no contextualisation, or you could say "Benito Mussolini (then a socialist activist)"? Mujinga (talk) 11:52, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Source (Levy 2007, pp. 212-213) says this:

Although Sbardelloto’s family was hounded by the local fascist hierarchy of Mel, and Benito Mussolini took a personal and strangely benevolent interest, leading interventionists and fascists “of the first hour” (Arpinati, Rocca, and Gioda) had been individualist anarchists who had praised “propaganda by the deed.” And Mussolini himself had written in praise of Orsini, Angiolillo, and Bresci before the war in the socialist Lotta di Classe on the anniversary of Umberto’s assassination.42

[42] See Mussolini’s article “Il Caso Manfredi,” L’Avvenire del Lavoratore, February 6, 1904, and also Lotta di classe, July 16, 1910. [...]

So it was the 10th year anniversary. I understand the problem with the way it describes him as a "socialist activist". Considering the source is discussing the direct roots of fascism in this pre-fascist period, I think something like "In 1910, the future fascist dictator Benito Mussolini praised Bresci in the pages of the socialist newspaper Lotta di Classe." Or something similar? -- Grnrchst (talk) 11:01, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yeah that's perfect Mujinga (talk) 15:01, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Bresci's family was forced to flee their home in Cliffside Park" - suggest adding New Jersey for clarity
  • "In 2021, an Italian darkwave duo named itself GBRESCI after Bresci.[66]" - i think this should be deleted, the duo do not themselves seem notable

References

[edit]
  • 65 needs author info
  • layout is mixed but that's ok for GA
  • sources are reliable
  • not finding any copyvio

Spotchecks

[edit]

On this version:

  • 6 ok
  • 16 makes a big claim, i can only access the Carey, which says:
In the heat of the noisy debate, a young barber  named Domenico Pazzaglia -- a friend of one of the West Hoboken group -- leaped to his feet, drew a gun and fired upon Malatesta, who fell, slightly wounded. Only the speedy action of a young man in the audience saved his life. Gaetano Bresci rushed forward and seized Pazzaglia.

Do the other sources back the rest of the claim?

  • Levy 2007, p. 211:

    Bresci was active in anarchist meetings and was part of the anarchist movement in Paterson, New Jersey. Indeed he saved Errico Malatesta, by successfully tackling an enraged individualist anarchist who took exception to a speech Malatesta was giving.

    Pernicone & Ottanelli 2018, pp. 143-144:

    On that evening of September 3, 1899, when Pazzaglia shot and wounded Malatesta, it was Bresci who disarmed the assailant.

    I guess if I'm being strict, I'd say calling it attempted murder is the only part of it that is technically OR, although that is how I understood it upon reading it. Can reword if necessary. --Grnrchst (talk) 12:19, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    could change "he disarmed a disgruntled individualist anarchist that had attempted to murder the old anarchist" to "he disarmed a disgruntled individualist anarchist who shot at the elderly anarchist" or similar Mujinga (talk) 15:02, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Rewritten. -- Grnrchst (talk) 16:10, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    sorry now i don't like the double use of anarchist - can you change one? Mujinga (talk) 13:22, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Any ideas for alternatives? I also just realised it's inappropriate to call Malatesta "elderly" here as he would have only been in his 40s at the time. :/ --Grnrchst (talk) 13:48, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh dear I was supposed to check the age thing as well hahaha. OK, how about changing "who had shot the elderly anarchist" to "who had taken a shot at him" or something like that? Mujinga (talk) 14:33, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I used "who had shot him", because he didn't just direct fire at Malatesta. Malatesta was wounded. -- Grnrchst (talk) 14:36, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    OK i think we got there in the end, but I do have to say the three sources above really do make it sound like he shot at Malatestsa Mujinga (talk) 14:42, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • 25 AGF
  • 41 cited info backed by sources- you could also add more about where he was imprisoned, being shackled, likelihood he was murdered by the guards etc
  • 58 "Anarchists in New York City formed the Bresci Circle in his honor" - not seeing that on page94? but i do see that in Paterson they formed the G.Bresci Group
  • Thanks for catching this. That sentence was written in a previous version of the article before I started expanding it,[1] and I guess I just assumed that the Bresci group and Bresci Circle were the same. --Grnrchst (talk) 12:35, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ok so the text still needs a bit of work because you prob do want to link to Bresci Circle, and right now it reads like the Paterson and NY groups are the same Mujinga (talk) 15:11, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • 62 sourced info is good, but on the same page it says Bresci's hometown was Turigliano. That's interesting because we have it as Prato, but he was buried in Turigliano cemetery ... can you resolve that?
  • I have to assume this was a mistake on the part of Paul Hofmann, as every single other source says he was from Prato. He doesn't cite a source for this, so I'm just clarifying it to Turigliano and leaving it there, as that detail at least is supported across sources. --Grnrchst (talk) 12:27, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
fair enough thanks for checking! Mujinga (talk) 15:10, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • 64 good

Broadness

[edit]
  • Perhaps a bit more on his death?
  • I've added more information on his death from Pernicone & Ottanelli 2018. Frankly I'm a bit disappointed in myself for not finishing this source before submitting the GA review. I'm sure there's probably some new prose issues (and maybe neutrality issues) that have been introduced here, so let me know what else I can do about this section. --Grnrchst (talk) 12:54, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
the improvements are welcome! i don't remember which source it was, probably carey, but somewhere it was talking about how the rightwing press celebrated his death, seeing justice in the murder. so that was more what i was hinting at adding. Mujinga (talk) 13:25, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, it was The New York Times apparently. Should I add that in? And where would it be most appropriate? Grnrchst (talk) 15:15, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yes i think it's worth adding, at the end of the "Trial and death" section, which will make it into a full paragraph Mujinga (talk) 15:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. -- Grnrchst (talk) 15:34, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

[edit]
  • Article is neutral overall

Stability

[edit]
  • Article is stable

Images

[edit]
  • Pix are relevant and appropriately licensed. Could use alts for accessibility.
New pic = File:Paterson, New Jersey ca. 1911 (cropped).jpg, all good Mujinga (talk) 10:17, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
New pic = File:Santostefcarcere.JPG, also all good Mujinga (talk) 13:21, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

[edit]

I'll take this on for review Mujinga (talk) 16:21, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of work needs to be done to get to GA standard, I'm confident it'll get there - putting on hold Mujinga (talk) 17:17, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
think I've replied on everything Mujinga (talk) 15:11, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cool the article is almost there now! I like the expansion of the lead, first para needs a full stop and I'd suggest adding United States after New Jersey. I'd also say paras 1&2 and paras 3&4 can be put together. You haven't answered on adding some contemproary news reports about his death, if you don't think that's necessary fine. And a link to the Bresci Circle hasn't been re-added yet. I think that's it, anything else to discuss? Mujinga (talk) 10:20, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done suggestions about lead. I'm looking into more about his death in Pernicone & Ottanelli 2018, as I never ended up using all the information I could have from that source.
About the Bresci Circle. On re-reading both Goyens 2017 and Lardner & Reppetto 2001, it does appear that they are talking about the same group. The former just refers to it as the "Bresci group" while the latter refers to it as the "Bresci Cirlce". So I've linked to Bresci circle within the current text. Hope that's ok. Grnrchst (talk) 11:45, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear now I'm confused again. So you are saying the G. Bresci Group in Paterson is effectively the same as the Bresci Circle in NY? Ref59 says Goyens pp59-60 but on gbooks that takes me to pages where i don't see Harlem mentioned. Likewise on ref60 p68 I don't see St Patricks?
A couple of other queries above as well. For my feeling we are nearly there now, I'll prob want to give the article a final read through since it has changed a bit, I'll do that after we've ironed out the last comments. Mujinga (talk) 13:32, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Doing a final read-through, things seem close now, but I'll flag up a few things:
  • Still think United States and Italy should be unlinked
  • Please identify who esare Lombroso
  • "Italy experienced a relative return to democracy" - is "relative" needed?
  • There's still the Goyens text/source integrity just above. Which might be a gbooks issue.
Nice expansion about his time in prison. "He also left the wine and cheese" - think that's better without "the"?
As a headsup I'll have intermittent internet from Tuesday, hopefully we'll be done before then. Mujinga (talk) 10:13, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Personally I don't see a problem with linking these, but if it is so bad I can unlink them.
Removed link to United States. I assume by "Italy" you mean the links in the infobox? I figured it would be worth keeping one of those, as they link to the Kingdom of Italy, which I think can be a useful link in the article given the subject. -- Grnrchst (talk) 15:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
fair enough on the rationale, yes I was talking about the infobox - you could also explicitly make it the link to Kingdom of Italy, but I'm not fussed Mujinga (talk) 11:48, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Identified as "Italian criminologist".
  • Removed
  • I'll have another double check on the Goyens discrepancy.
Any other thoughts about the section on his death? With cases like this, I worry that I'm straying into non-neutrality through implication or otherwise, so I just want to make sure. --Grnrchst (talk) 11:58, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Seems neutral and focused to me, but feel free to mention a specific word or sentence? Mujinga (talk) 12:04, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's just the paragraph about his death that I'm worried about. If you don't see any problems with it, then that's fine by me. I'm just trying to be cautious. -- Grnrchst (talk) 13:21, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Gbooks version isn't paginated, so I replaced the link to it with one to the Internet Archive's version. Going through my copy I just realised my citation formatting was incomplete, so I filled it out properly. (Now listing the specific authors of each chapter, rather than the editor, etc.)
I'll quote the full passages here (Bencivenni 2017, pp. 59-60):

Lacking a central party or organization, these political groups formed the cornerstone of the movement. Most were small and insular, with between twenty and forty members, but Paterson’s Bresci and Diritto all’Esistenza (Right of Existence) each counted a few hundred comrades, were multiethnic, and persisted for almost two decades, until the Red Scare. One 1914 police report put the membership of the Bresci group at nearly six hundred and described them as “a cosmopolitan lot” who “met regularly in the basement of a building at 301 East 106th Street, a shabby house in a shabby district east of the New York Central tracks.”

And from Bencivenni 2017, p. 68:

Determined to combat their enemy by any means necessary, hard-­core followers of Galleani (including Carlo Valdinoci, Mario Buda, Mary Nardini, and Ella Antolini) began to retaliate with terrorist actions. Members of the Bresci group in East Harlem, who were staunch supporters of Galleani, had long been suspected of terrorism. In 1914, they and Jewish anarchists from the Ferrer Center allegedly plotted the assassination of John D. Rockefeller in retaliation for the Ludlow Massacre, in which eleven women and two children died. Amedeo Polignani, an Italian American agent provocateur working for the New York Police Department’s antiradical unit, consequently infiltrated the Bresci group, and in 1915, two of its members, Frank Abarno and Carmine Carbone, were framed and convicted of a plot to bomb St. Patrick’s Cathedral.

The above is why I assumed that the "Bresci group" and "Bresci circle" were the same thing. -- Grnrchst (talk) 12:11, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This still needs ironing out from my perspective, since currently we have "Italian anarchists in Paterson established a group in his name." referenced to Castañeda 2017, p. 94 which says "A group of Paterson's Italian anarchists formed the G.Bresci Group", whilst the wikilink goes to Bresci Circle which says "The Bresci Circle was a group of New York City anarchists". So it's not clear to me it's the same group under the circle name. Bencivenni doesn't name it as the Bresci Circle so it feels SYNTHY unfortunately. Also on p59 it says the Paterson group counted a few hundred, whilst on the next page it says the NYC group was nearly six hundred, which makes them seem different. Maybe it was all very fluid and I'm over thinking this. Mujinga (talk) 12:03, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, I understand that it feels synthy. I've attempted to clarify that there were groups in Paterson and New York, based on the sources. The Bresci circle link is now added to "New York-based Bresci group". I'm trying my best to rectify this. Let me know if there's still problems. -- Grnrchst (talk) 13:18, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In terms of text/source integrity we got there. Nice one for all the hard work you have put in here Grnrchst! I've made an edit for readability which you'd be welcome to change and will make this a good article now. Mujinga (talk) 14:29, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 00:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Grnrchst (talk). Self-nominated at 21:03, 1 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Gaetano Bresci; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • Article has been significantly expanded and improved very recently, there are no copyvio or plagiarism concerns, reliable sources are used. Hook 1 (ice cream) is great! QPQ also done.

Illustration of three shots

[edit]
Period illustration of where Umberto was shot

I've uploaded this illustration from the New York Herald (Aug 1, 1900) showing where Umberto was shot, which could be a useful visual aid but, given the other inaccuracies in the press at this time, I'm not sure how accurate it is. Is there documentation corroborating this illustration? czar 12:06, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Separate article "Assassination of Umberto I of Italy"

[edit]

Hi, dear colleagues! Please, I got a question/request/ask for help. Just a few hours ago I tried to upload an article Assassination of Umberto I, topic which automaticaly is redirected to this page as the amout of information here about the act is adequate. My intention was to create a solo page, which already exist in a same way in Italian a and French version. This article was put down without any notice and the link was brought back to Gaetano Bresci page.

I see the problematics of the text itself, which I patrially translated from it/fr versions, partially used existing and souced one from this page. Sorry, I would consider myself as a new guy and I'm trying to learn, but althrugh my amateurism I really don't see very functional to inform about this pretty important history event just thrugh the person of the attacker. As I looked around, a lot of similar page types are working separately with a different attitude for the topic: Gavrlio Princip - Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, Harvey Lee Oswald - Assassination of John F. Kennedy, Leon Czolgosz - Assassination of William McKinley and so on, not mentioning the assassination attempts pages. Why should be this case different?

Well, if anyone with the rank can tell me: what did I do wrong? Is it a too large text use from here? Would the separate one work with just the translation of it/fr version plus adequate English sources? I got some text code backup, so if there should be the solo one at the end, I could work with that. Don't mind the time spent, but I'd really like to advocate for this idea to inform about this violent incident with a slighly more proper attitude.

Hope not being cheeky, best and thanks for help and collabo, friends! :) Anatol Svahilec (talk) 10:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Anatol Svahilec: Hi, thanks for bringing this to the talk page. To start off with what went wrong: you copied text from other articles without providing attribution, which is required by the Wikipedia license; and much of the text you copied is entirely without citations to sources. So what you had left over was a carbon copy of work I did for this article, which you didn't credit, spliced in with text we can't verify as there are no citations provided, copied from other language Wikipedias which you also didn't credit.
I agree that the event itself should have its own article, but this kind of copy-paste fair isn't the way to go about it. For one, when I wrote about the assassination for this article, I was focused on Bresci as the article is about Bresci. An article about the assassination itself would need to provide more points of view, including information about the King, the event and the security. I think the way to go about creating an article about the assassination is to go through the sources yourself and write something new, providing a complete picture of the event, rather than just copying something from a different article that has a different scope. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Grnrchst, thanks for a prompt answer! Yes, I got it and sorry again. Thanks for the good news - I'll try to work on it better: imprortant is than it's not "no go" situation.
Do you think I can show you the stuff before I put it on and eventually discuss that with you? I guess my approach would be to work better with the it/fr versions and in terms of the events of 29 July 1900 I related article link about G. Bresci. Can I do it thru my sandbox somehow?
Thanks (for the patience also...) and sorry for learning the rules thru breaking them! Anatol Svahilec (talk) 11:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Anatol Svahilec: No bother at all! Yes I'd definitely recommend working on it in your sandbox, and I'd be more than happy to give it a look over if you ping me. Once you think it's ready, I'd recommend putting it in draft space and then submitting it to articles for creation to have an experienced reviewer look over it before publication.
And don't worry about learning the rules through breaking them, that's how almost everyone learns! --Grnrchst (talk) 12:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again! Well, I tried to work on it a bit, you can check it out, following the foreign versions more and keeping the topic more ballanced. To be super honest, my intention is not to go to the very detail: for that serves your text in the best way I declare. If you would have some ideas how it's possible to use some of your parts in a correct way, feel free to bring it up, I would be happy and honoured. It's basically a text draft, sources and some links are missing, but I guess I would work on that after your test check. Main question is if you would consider that - or some text based on that - as the adequate replacement for Assassination of Umberto I link.
User:Anatol Svahilec/sandbox
Thanks again for your ideas and good will, best! Anatol Svahilec (talk) 15:32, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Anatol Svahilec: I think this is more along the lines of what a dedicated article about the assassination should look like. It maintains a more broad and balanced perspective, and provides very helpful context on previous attempts against Umberto, which is good to see. If you're going to use text from this article, just make sure that it's not giving undue weight to Bresci and that you're not just duplicating large chunks of the Bresci article. An article isn't worth having if it says the same thing as a different one.
Big issue remaining with this is the sourcing. Most of these paragraphs don't cite any sources. That's something that must be fixed before submitting it as an article, or it's just going to get deleted again. --Grnrchst (talk) 15:45, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Copy that, workin' on it! Anatol Svahilec (talk) 16:31, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think I'm basicaly done: just to rearrange some pictures, that would be it. Can you check it out again please and if it seems fine for ya, let me know how should I upload it? Draft space? Also want to ask who should take care about the redirection change. Anatol Svahilec (talk) 17:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Anatol Svahilec: There's still sections without citations, which I think will still need to be seen to. Once you think it's ready, put it at Draft:Assassination of Umberto I of Italy and submit it to Articles for Creation. We can sort out the redirects once the article has been approved. --Grnrchst (talk) 18:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gaetano_Bresci&oldid=1244707446"