Talk:1946 Italian institutional referendum

Untitled

Duplicate article: Birth of the Italian Republic is the same as Festa della Repubblica —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.208.83.208 (talk) 11:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Gianfranco, I'll move this page to Birth of the Italian Republic (capitalisation, adding "the") unless you have a better proposal. Jeronimo 01:35 Aug 5, 2002 (PDT)

Yes, please, it would be fine if you could correct it. I always have some problems with capitalisation, as this is really a deep conceptual difference with my native language, but I do hope one day I'll be able to finally learn the rule - and to apply it (I also do hope people are still patient with me in the meanwhile...) :-)) --G

OK, I'll make the move. As for the capitalisation, remember this (I'm not a native speaker either, btw):

• All proper names are capitalised: Italy, Gianfranco
• Adjectives of proper names are also capitalised: Italian

In this case, the Italian Republic is a proper name, like Roman Empire. And to make it sound less like Russian :-) we include an article as well. Regards, Jeronimo

Thank you, Geronimo, I'll do my best :-))) --G

I have clarified the way the first part flows. I think it makes more sense now and I hope I did not erase any original intended meaning. Please advise.

I will try to clarify the rest of the page later, if everything in the first part works.

--Flyhighplato 16:48, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

31 January 2005 re-write== I've undertaken a massive re-write of this to make the English flow better. This is an excellent and informative article, but it suffered in the translation. I hope that I have helped. I am not a scholar of Italian history, so please accept my apologies if I have made any mistakes, and do not hesitate to correct them. Kevintoronto 19:08, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Some of the factual statements in this article are inconsistent with statements in Umberto II of Italy, but I don't know which article is correct. RussBlau 14:18, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

Name inconsistencies

I notice that this article mixes Italian and English forms of the names of the kings. It's "Vittorio Emanuele" everywhere except in the caption of the portrait and one more occasion, but "Humbert" instead of "Umberto". Victor Emmanuel III of Italy uses the English form. Probably this article should too? -- Magnus Holmgren 11:49, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, and actually Vittorio Emanuele is often mispelled (Emmanuelle, Emanuelle, etc.). It seems a common procedure to use the English version of the name if it is in use in English speaking countries. Please some native speakers could correct this? --Raffa 19:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Five years, and this hasn't been addressed yet, there is a mixture of Victor and Vittorio, and Emanuele, Emanuel, and Emmanuel. I am Italian, for what it's worth, and the correct Italian name is Vittorio Emanuele. However since changing all the names would be a pretty important edit, I don't feel confident to do it by my own without a consensous. Nineko (talk) 21:46, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Referendum Italy.png

Image:Referendum Italy.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Κaiba 18:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

File:Vittorio Emanuele III 1936.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Vittorio Emanuele III 1936.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Clarification of "Quirinal" needed

The word "Quirinal" is mentioned once in the current version of the article, without any explanation as to what it means. There's an redirect from Quirinal to Quirinal Hill, which says that it "is the location of the official residence of the Italian Head of State, who resides in the Quirinal Palace; by metonymy 'the Quirinal' has come to stand for the Italian President." But even that doesn't explain what is meant by the sentence "But she was not able to produce the expected consensus around the Quirinal." Someone who knows what's meant here should clarify. Teemu Leisti (talk) 22:38, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Fraud?

The sentence "Monarchists advanced suspicions of fraud that were never allowed to be proved." in the beginning of the article would need an elaboration further down in the article. Why were there suspictions and what fraud would there have been? Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 23:57, 10 March 2015 (UTC) The text now reads "Monarchists had suspicions of fraud, but were never allowed to prove these.". The use of "allowed" make this, it seems to me, a loaded statement. I find no justification of it in the rest of the article or in https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nascita_della_Repubblica_Italiana#Il_sospetto_di_brogli_elettorali (italian wikipedia page "the birth of the italian republic : suspicion of electoral fraud"). I will change "allowed" to "able" if nobody objects. Masonmilan (talk) 16:46, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Seconded, the word "allowed" implies they were prohibited- "never had the opportunity" would be more neutral. If monarchists were demostratably denied from scrutinizing the results etc. this would have to be strongly supported with citation.

--Willthewanderer (talk) 08:35, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Abdication

There are currently no references cited in this section, and the phrasing appears to convey an editorial POV on the motives and motivations of the members of the royal family the subject of the article, for example

... old, rough Victor Emmanuel who was unknown for any particular activity ...

... the uncertain, irresolute, ambiguous tendency of the Savoy dynasty ...

Are there sources for the text in this section? Chipinoz (talk) 08:12, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Voting days

Even if the referendum is generally recalled with its starting date on June 2, 1946, actually the voting procedures ended on the following day (June 3) at 1pm. I have found only Italian sources (one of which is the Quirinal, the Presidency of the Republic - page 3, "Polls open on the morning of Sunday, June 2, at 7 am. Polls close at 1 pm the next day"), but I'm pretty sure this detail can be found in English sources too, so if you have any, please add them, thx :-) g (talk) 02:07, 21 January 2023 (UTC)