Talk:Italianization of South Tyrol

Move to Italianization of Alto Adige-South Tyrol

The move is an example of name changing and page moving without attention to the historical details... the area was not called Alto Adige until 1948, but the events in the article unfolded between 1922 and 1943. The people subjugated to the Italianization called themselves (and still do) Südtiroler (South Tyroleans) and the area is called Südtirol (South Tyrol) by them. One of the first steps of the Italianization campaign was to forbid exactly these two names - so: the province name was Province of Bolzano and the people hit by the campaign where the South Tyroleans, not the entire population of the province. in short: There is absolutely no justification for Alto-Adige in the title of this article. Come on - we also do not write i.e. "Mayoral election in New York-Nieuw Amsterdam"... please revert this move, it is historically not correct. --noclador (talk) 08:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I moved this article to Italianization of Alto Adige-South Tyrol just because this is a sort of sub-page of History of Alto Adige-South Tyrol: it seemed the consensus was to use that string for this type of articles.--Supparluca 16:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

no answer? Does this mean that I have to move the page back... ? --noclador (talk) 11:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Wait a day or two, and then you can do it yourself.  Andreas  ^(T) 13:02, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

1. Supparluca, who has done the move, is the one ho has to explain his reasons, not vice versa.
2. The move to Italianization of Alto Adige-South Tyrol is both an anachronism and historically absurd, since the term "Alto Adige" itself is the product of the Italinization process described. The area to be italinized was South Tyrol, the result was the invented name "Alto Adige". Or, again differently put, you could not italinize Alto Adige, because it did not exist then; the area to be italinized was rather undisputedly a part of the region named Tyrol in English. The object of the Italinization process was South Tyrol, hence the only historically correct titile name is "Italianization of South Tyrol", if we do not want to confuse cause and effect. In contrast, "Italianization of Alto Adige" would be as absurd as "Polonization of Gdansk" (correctly: Polonization of Danzig), or "Turkization of Turkey" (correctly: Turkization of Asia Minor). It would be as anachronistic as "Sovietization of the GDR", as the GDR was actually only product and result of this very process - just as Alto Adige is of the Italianization process. Therefore "Italianization of South Tyrol". Gun Powder Ma (talk) 01:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Of course we have to use the name that is more commonly used in English - or the title of the article, if we have an article. In ~1940 the province of Bolzano was already part of Italy: we should refer to the article Province of Bolzano-Bozen then; so we can move this article to Italianization of the province of Bolzano-Bozen, right?--Supparluca 16:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

The "province of Bolzano-Bozen" did not even exist then, and geographical names by hyphen are discouraged at Wikipedia as you are well aware. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 23:43, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

~1940? The province as it exists today was created in 1926, but certainly it wasn't called "South Tyrol" before 1926. And anyway, in the 16th century Italy didn't exist, but we still say that Galilei was born in Italy.--Supparluca 13:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, just as Galileo was not born in the Italian Republic, which did not even exist then, the described Italianization process could not have taken place in the "province of Bolzano-Bozen", which did not exist then, neither (before 1972, it was the "province of Bolzano"). However, just as Galileo was indisputably born in the Italy (=historical region), there is equally no denying that the Italinization process took place in Tyrol, in the southern part of the historical region which for centuries held this name and still does, that is in South Tyrol. The only term which fits the contents is South Tyrol, "province of Bolzano-Bozen", "province of Bolzano", "Alto Adige", in contrast, have had ephemeral status, came only (much) later in existence and/or were invented through the very process described. But you raised a good point that the invented nature of many names for South Tyrol needs to be addressed in the article, it was really a main part of the fascist assimilation programme. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 02:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Do you read what I write? You have to prove that the name used in English between 1922 and 1945 was different from the name used in English now (that is, according to the English wikipedia, province of Bolzano-Bozen). Otherwise, we have to use the modern name, because Tyrol was divided before the period between 1922 and 1945 (that is, 1918-1919).--Supparluca 12:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Could you please address my objections? That would assure progress in this discussion. In what way can a place name of no earlier than 1972 describe events which took place 50 years earlier? We dont talk of the Republic of Italy (est. in 1945) in connection with events in the 1920s (but of the Kingdom of Italy), so there is no reason to talk of a Province of Bolzano-Bozen, either. And, as a side-note, your uncompromising attitude on the South Tyrol issue might give rise to a growing feeling to remove the article name Province of Bolzano-Bozen back to South Tyrol. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 17:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I still don't understand why you say "a place name of no earlier than 1972", but anyway, the issue is simple: can you "prove that the name used in English between 1922 and 1945 was different from the name used in English now (province of Bolzano-Bozen)"? Using your same logic, we shouldn't "talk of Tyrol (1140-1919) in connection with events in the 1940s", should we? "And, as a side-note, edits like this clearly prove that I'm uncompromisingly against the name San Lorenzo di Sebato" (selective attention?).--Supparluca 11:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

No no, my dear: You have to prove that Province of Bolzano-Bozen was used in English from 1922 on... --Mai-Sachme (talk) 12:05, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

The name "Province of Bolzano-Bozen" was introduced as late as the Revised Autonomy Statutes of 1972 (see Antony Alcock - The South Tyrol Autonomy). The use of Tyrol in the 1940s is perfectly ok, because the region never has ceased to be called that way (with the arguable exception of the formerly Welschtirol, now commonly Trentino). Gun Powder Ma (talk) 18:20, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

To add my viewpoint: I agree to Gun Powder Ma who pointed out that the name Alto Adige (or rather the use of it) is itself the product of the Italianization of South Tyrol. Therefore the title of the article should remain unchanged. (As it seems, this has not been proposed for a long time anyway.) However, I suggest to point out in the in very first sentence that the province is today called Alto Adige by replacing "(today South Tyrol)" with "(today Alto Adige/South Tyrol)", which would make sense for the specific reason that the process of italianization can be traced in the naming. Should anybody seriously object to the use of "Alto Adige" at all, I did a quick (and superficial) corpus research, comparing the frequency of "South Tyrol" and "Alto Adige" in BNC and COCA. At first sight, it seems that the "Alto Adige" is preferred in COCA [12 hits] (specifically, the NYTimes always uses "Alto Adige", using "South Tyrol" only in one context in which Alto Adige is commonly used). South Tyrol [9 hits] is mainly used in once source which talks about the role the Catholic Church of South Tyrol played in helping escaping Nazis after WWII. In the BNC, however, "Alto Adige" produced only 2 hits (from two different sources) compared to 11 hits for South Tyrol (used in roughly 4 different sources). Even though I realize the corpus search is rather superficial using only two (albeit large) corpora, I think the data provides enough justification to use both names of the (today bilingual) province in the introductory sentence. --Mampfus (talk) 17:48, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

We've had this discussion at least 200 times in the last couple of years. To cut a long story short: the most commonly used English name for the province is clearly South Tyrol (occasionally with the spelling South Tirol). The appearance of the synonym Alto Adige is largely limited to gastronomic contexts (among others due to the fact that the SMG decided to use that name for the export of local products to the US), the occurrence within the phrase Trentino-Alto Adige and translations of Italian sources. Anyway, feel free to replace the section in question with something like ...the southern part of Tyrol which is today called South Tyrol (in Italian Alto Adige)... --Mai-Sachme (talk) 19:43, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Original content

To comply with GNU licencing rules note that this article was originally creted by me from contents of Prontuario dei nomi locali_dell'Alto Adige.  Andreas  ^(T) 13:19, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Image:Tirol-Suedtirol-Trentino.png

This bot has detected that this page contains an image, Image:Tirol-Suedtirol-Trentino.png, in a raster format. A replacement is available as a Scalable vector graphic (SVG) at File:Tirol-Suedtirol-Trentino.svg. If the replacement image is suitable please edit the article to use the vector version. Scalable vector graphics should be used in preference to raster for images that can easily represented in a vector graphic format. If this bot is in error, you may leave a bug report at its talk page Thanks SVnaGBot1 (talk) 15:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

ENGLISH PAGE: Italianization of South Tyrol

Some comments on the article. The article needs improvements with regard to English language usage. It sometimes reads like a literal translation from Italian, where some English expressions were constructed based on Italian phraseology. Here are some examples: - Association of Alto Adige and Trentino in a single province with the capital city of Trento.

- As a consequence of this, the society of South Tyrol was deeply riven

- Dissolution of Alpine associations not under command of the Italian Alpine Club

- Italianization of road and pathnames

- The German-speaking population reacted by the establishment....

- often hidden in religious buildings before distributed to the South Tyroleans

In the following sentence, the use of federal is incorrect, as the Kingdom of Italy had no federal structure: - "use of the Italian language became mandatory on all levels of federal, provincial and local government"

Furthermore, the article relies heavily on the work of Steininger, Rolf (2003)and reads like an excerpt from his book.This may limit the level of accountability of this article.

I have changed the reference to South Tyrol from the southern part of the County of Tyrol to the middle part of the County of Tyrol. In fact, as clearly shown on the map, the southern part of the Hapsburg County of Tyrol corresponded to modern day Trentino (a.k.a. Welschtirol or Tirolo Meridionale) I also changed the first paragraph to read ....determined the status of the German and Ladin (Rhaeto-Romanic) ethnic groups living in the region because the agreement applied to all language minorities living in the region annexed to Italy after WWI, which included Trentino and former Tyrolean municipalities that had been separated from the region and assigned to other provinces. 62.151.117.48 (talk) 13:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)