Talk:Middle Italy (political party)

Democratic Party

This party is a possible member constituent of the Democratic Party according to some other Wikipedia pages, so the entry for this party should be amended.

Not a possible member, certainly a member. —Nightstallion 19:10, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Name

This translation is really bad, the page should be moved to Italy of Middle or to Italia di Mezzo --Maremmano (talk) 19:14, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

The current translation is quite good to me. "Italy of Middle" is not correct English and is definitely less precise. --Checco (talk) 14:15, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

It's a difficult name to translate into English, and I'm not sure what to suggest as an more accurate or elegant translation than the current title, but indeed Italy of Middle is grammatically incorrect.--Autospark (talk) 21:40, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok, but the current translation is horrible (Italia in mezzo alla strada? Italia a metà strada?). If you disagree with Italy of Middle I'll move the page to the original name, Italia di Mezzo--Maremmano (talk) 12:32, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

"Middle-of-the-road" means "centrist" in English. You are not mandated to speak fluent English, but be humbler at least! --Checco (talk) 07:35, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

And you haven't the consensus to impose this ridiculous name! The only possible translation of Italia di Mezzo is Middle-Italy (Middle Bridge = Ponte di mezzo, Middle-Earth = Terra di mezzo, etc.) but it also has another meaning. However, if a literal translation isn't possible (for example Forza Italia) the party has to be named with its original name, not with not with an unlikely arranged translation! I can't accept a translation such as Middle-of-the-road Italy!--Maremmano (talk) 20:18, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

That name has been there since October 2006 (for virtually eight years) and was upheld by authoritative users like Nightstallion and Autospark. As I already told you many times, you are free to edit whichever article you want, but, when a user challenges one of your edits and re-instates the previous compromise or established version, you need to stop re-proposing your version and discuss. Discussion is not a bad thing: you can always learn things you don't know from other people, e.g. that "middle of the road" (with hyphens when used as an adjective) is a widely used (especially in the United States, I would say) synonym for political centrism. That is why I think that the established name of this article was (and is) OK. This said, I'm more than welcome to discuss other choices and "Middle-Italy" could be a good solution, as Italia di mezzo is a clear reference to Tolkien's Middle-earth (Terra di mezzo in Italian). Before moving the article to a new destination, I would ask an opinion from an English native speaker. --Checco (talk) 09:18, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I have have no strong objection with the currently established name, although my gut instinct was previously to think that 'Italy of the Middle' is the most straightforward translation. However, I see the comparison with the translation of Tolkien, something I wasn't aware of, so I think that Middle Italy (no hyphen) is the best compromise solution.--Autospark (talk) 12:26, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I didn't know that "Italy of the Middle" is correct in English (@Autospark: thanks for your clarification!) and I also agree that "Middle Italy" (without hyphen) could be a very good compromise solution. If Maremmano agrees too, I would leave to him the "honor" of moving the article to the compromise destination, otherwise let's leave the article where it is. Any other opinions from Nightstallion or someone else? --Checco (talk) 12:38, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

For me Middle-of-the-road Italy is really bad and "Italy of the Middle" would be the perfect name, but also the name "Middle Italy" is acceptable.

ps: Moving the pages isn't an honor for me, but if I find a bad translation I think it should be changed--Maremmano (talk) 08:19, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

In my opinion, Italia di Mezzo would be the best solution if this party is never mentioned in English-language sources (and it seems so, given that none of you has presented one). Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research are core content policies. On the other hand, "Wikipedia:Use English" is not even a binding policy at all, even though it is often cited. Wikipedia:Article titles#English-language titles and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) only say that English-language titles should be used if they exist. They do not ask us to invent English-language translations in cases in which no English translation of a proper noun exists. "WP:UE" does not oblige us to use English-language names at any rate. To the opposite: WP:V and WP:NOR strongly discourage titles that are invented by Wikipedia users. This opinion of mine applies to every organisation or party that is never mentioned in an English-language source. --RJFF (talk) 15:26, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

WP:EN says that "It can happen that an otherwise notable topic has not yet received much attention in the English-speaking world, so that there are too few English sources to constitute an established usage. (...) If this happens, follow the conventions of the language in which this entity is most often talked about." Pretty clear, I think. --RJFF (talk) 15:34, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I totally agree with RJFF, there are a lot of original researches in the pages on italian political parties--Maremmano (talk) 08:47, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

RJFF offered very good points, but, as there is an obvious, literal translation ("Middle Italy"), I would stick to that. --Checco (talk) 07:27, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Guys, why don't you argue with sources if they exist? This would make your position much stronger! Here you go: [1], [2], [3]. Even The Australian and Bloomberg! How much better a source can you wish for, if it is about a tiny Italian splinter party... And the authors seem to be native English speakers too, if you can tell looking at their names. I think this case is resolved. But I think it should be at Middle Italy (political party), and Middle Italy should either be a redirect to Central Italy or a disambiguation page. If I google "Middle Italy", by far the most hits are related to central Italy and not to this short-lived splinter party. --RJFF (talk) 10:15, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks, RJFF, for your insights! I agree with your observation. Let's go with Middle Italy (political party)! --Checco (talk) 14:18, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Agreed, we have an article title that ticks every box. Thank you RJFF.--Autospark (talk) 14:41, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, RJFF. In this case there is no longer any doubt. I move the page--Maremmano (talk) 22:55, 7 July 2014 (UTC)