Talk:Italy (geographical region)

·

Sourcing

Can we get some sources here that aren't Italian, otherwise this seems like a bit of an irredentist axe-grinding honeypot? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:39, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

For example, the currently used source:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1023852 "Historical, Geopolitical and Economic Factors Affecting State and Nation Boundaries: Foreword on Italy's Borders in Istria and Dalmatia" University of Milan Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche Working Paper No. 41 by Arnaldo Mauri

This is apparently a professor of economics explaining the history of Italy not from some sort of a geographical perspective, but quite obviously involving politics and history. Even the mention of physical geography is this apparently:

La Grecia è tuttavia riuscita a mantenere il possesso di quasi tutte le isole dell’Egeo, anche di quelle a prossime alla costa anatolica, mentre l’Italia ha perduto tutte le isole dalmate e persino l’Arcipelago di Pelagosa che la geografia fisica attribuisce inequivocabilmente alla nostra penisola

(google translate) However, Greece has managed to keep possession of almost all of them the Aegean islands, also those close to the Anatolian coast, while Italy has lost all the Dalmatian islands and even the Pelagosa Archipelago that physical geography unequivocally attributes to our peninsula

To use this source which clearly uses "Italy" to mean the political and historical entity of Italy, to make a universal claim that Pelagosa is part of "Italy (geographical region)", not even "Italian peninsula" which are his words, reeks of WP:SYNTH. --Joy (talk) 12:41, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

In the history of the article I've noticed edits such as this one by Vaselineeeeeeee that removed the mention of political geography in one place without explanation. Substantial amounts of this content seems to have been contributed by LukeWiller. Yeagvr's original version of the article did not mention Istria or Pelagosa, but did mention Cherso and Lussino. --Joy (talk) 12:50, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I confirm, I have expanded the article a lot by translating from the homonymous article on Wikipedia in Italian. On the source you mention, I agree with you: it's an original research because it mixes politics and history with geography, so the source should be removed. --LukeWiller (talk) 18:25, 11 June 2023 (UTC).

Can you find the exact quote from the encyclopedia, L'Enciclopedia Geografica Vol I - Italia, 2004, p. 78?

This could be https://worldcat.org/formats-editions/1103625322 or https://worldcat.org/formats-editions/801331294 - the latest edition seems to be a few years newer still. --Joy (talk) 18:43, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't have the possibility to read the encyclopedia you mentioned, but fortunately, I have one of the most authoritative encyclopedias at home: Treccani (see also it:Enciclopedia Treccani)... :-) Here I will report what is written in: "Italia", Dizionario enciclopedico italiano, vol. VI, Treccani, 1970, p. 413. In the paragraph that describes the Italian geographical region it says (I'm writing it in Italian, so you can read the original): "Considerata come regione naturale, entro lo spartiacque alpino e i tre mari (Adriatico, Ionio, e Tirreno con il Mar Ligure) che la cingono, l'Italia (comprese le isole giacenti sulla piattaforma continentale collegata ad essa) ha una superficie di 321.700 km2. Ma diverse regioni continentali (Canton Ticino e Istria) e insulari (Corsica) incluse in questi limiti non fanno parte politicamente dello stato italiano." Then searching on the Internet, again with reference to Treccani, I found this page, which is much more detailed (among other things, the total area coincides with that mentioned in the text I wrote to you earlier, the one found in the paper encyclopedia I have at home: 321,700 km2). Try reading in the section ""Geografia/Italia fisica/Confini e area": https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/italia_%28Enciclopedia-Italiana%29/ . LukeWiller (talk) 19:34, 11 June 2023 (UTC).

OK, but Treccani is a general encyclopedia so it's a tertiary source, it's not exactly compliant with WP:EXTRAORDINARY. --Joy (talk) 19:01, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Given the authoritativeness of the source, which is absolute, as you can read (with source) in the article it:Enciclopedia Treccani ("Treccani is probably considered the greatest Italian publishing company in the cultural field, as well as one of the most major encyclopedias of the 20th century, along with the Encyclopædia Britannica 11th edition and the Enciclopedia universal ilustrada europeo-americana), we are in this case WP:IGNORE. In other words, Treccani is not just any general encyclopaedia. This of course, is my opinion. --LukeWiller (talk) 21:14, 12 June 2023 (UTC).

You don't have to ignore all rules, and in fact I don't think you should - if Treccani's article on this topic is beyond reproach, surely it would be easy for you to find supporting secondary sources for it, so that we respect the WP:PSTS policy. I'm sure you can understand the idea of being wary of trusting national encyclopedias on national-related topics, and how the average English reader isn't best served by reading any national perspective instead of the perspective of e.g. English-speaking scholarship on the topic. --Joy (talk) 10:31, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the answer, I understand what you mean. I will try to search again. --LukeWiller (talk) 11:59, 13 June 2023 (UTC).

Was there any progress on this issue?

For reference, the article Julian March describes a similar kind of a terminology as created in the 19th-century time of romantic nationalism, and endorsed by irredentists... --Joy (talk) 20:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

No, unfortunately I couldn't find any source. --LukeWiller (talk) 21:23, 28 May 2024 (UTC).

rename to south-central Europe

This so-called Italian geographical region is one of the three subregions that make up Southern Europe. I reckon it should be renamed South-central Europe instead because this subregion not only contains Italy, but also Malta, San Marino, and Vatican City. 2001:8003:9008:1301:799A:1738:90C2:7640 (talk) 13:20, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Italian peninsula

Also, the islands of Corsica, Sardinia and Sicily are not part of the Italian peninsula. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.254.127.165 (talk) 06:08, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Pelagie Islands

@Mvvnlightbae: According to the bluehabitats.org website, all three islands (Lampedusa, Lampione, and Linosa) of the Pelagie Islands are located on the African continental shelf. How come only Linosa is considered a part of the Italian geographical region while the other two islands aren't? Shouldn't all of them be excluded from the Italian geographical region?

Link:

https://grid-arendal.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Embed/index.html?webmap=342d8cbfac074a53afa5e49bd0c53773&extent=-180,-81.3975,180,80.8344&home=true&zoom=true&scale=true&legendlayers=true&disable_scroll=false&theme=dark

120.16.55.218 (talk) 00:41, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Area percentages

According to the article, the continental, peninsular, and insular parts occupy 40%, 45%, and 18.5% of the Italian geographical region respectively. These figures aren't accurate as they add up to more than 100%. Do we have a better source for that? 120.16.55.218 (talk) 01:16, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

This is an irredentist article masquerading as an encyclopedia article

The map used is a historic Italian map and the article uses it to claim that this is a geographical article. The article makes a false claim that Istria, Corsica, and Cres belong to "Italy(geographical region)". Moreover, no reputable source is cited, only Italian far-right scholars which advance neofascist views and territorial pretensions. I suggest this article should be deleted as unsubstantiated and at the same time expressing illegal viewpoints, making it completely unsuitable for an encyclopedia. 213.190.26.10 (talk) 17:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Cry me a river RBB W (talk) 09:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)