Talk:Politics of Lombardy

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Translation issues

Dear IP,

I undestand that you are Italian and that you are a newcomer of English Wikipedia. We had some clashes over rollbacks, translations and other issues. First of all, let me tell you that it would be better if you provide yourself with a nickname, so that it will be easier for users to recognize you when you contribute to Wikipedia. Secondly, please avoid total rollbacks in favor of more specific edits: other users are not always wrong and something they do may be OK also for you. Take Template:Politics of Lombardy. You reject the term "government" as a translation for "giunta", even if leading constitutionalists as Augusto Barbera and Carlo Fusaro will agree with me. Think only about the fact that their "Corso di diritto pubblico" includes a chapter titled "I governi regionali e locali".

In general it is better to use terms that everyone in the world is able to understand: "statute" istead of "constitution" could be OK even if in English we usually use "constitution" when speaking about the basic law of a state or region, but definitely "administration" and "aldermen" are not OK. "Regional government" and "regional ministers", underlining "regional", are far better and clearer. We can also agree over "semi-presidential", even if most Italian constitutionalists speak of "presidential": Italian regional systems are similar to the US model than to the French one.

--Checco (talk) 16:38, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, it's harsh to say that, in English, speaking about "administrations" we don't think to the Executive. I can remember you the Obama administration. About semipresidential system, the main difference between PR and SEMIPR is the separation of powers (PR) against the link of confidence (SEMI). And, in the Italian regional system, legislative and executive are clearly linked together. Then, you can find the French system called faster as "presidential", but "semipr" is more accurate. About Aldermen, they are not ministers. A ministry (as it happens in German Lander) has a legal, singular existence; in Italy, only the Region, not the "assessorati", has the so-called personalità giuridica (legal personality). For Statute, I can remember you the Statutes of Westminster. As you can see, English language is wider than you think. ;-) NumberOne --79.45.156.70 (talk) 16:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please have an account! It is useful expecially to recognize your edits!

"Administration" and "Secretaries" are used in the United States, "Secretaries" in the UK is also used, while in Europe we generally use "ministers" and here we are talking about . Why do you oppose that? Italy is not a federal country... so what? "Alderman" has a specific meaning and don't think is correct to use in order to translate assessore: "regional minister" is definitely better.

I found no source describing the Italian regional systems as "semi-presidential"... Can you find one?

Statute is OK for me: as you see we can find a compromise if we discuss. --Checco (talk) 17:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try to understand: Google Translator gave us that translation, we can not choose a fantasy translation we like. Now I must go out: I hope the speak again with you later. By! NumberOne --79.45.156.70 (talk) 17:17, 15 January 2010 (UTC) (by the way, I suggest you to read sources about the difference between PR and SEMIPR, which is centered in the link of confidence. BY!)[reply]

As I told you, I can agree with you on "statute" and on "semi-presidentialism" (even if you did not find sources that support your opinion: indeed not only the regional President can dismiss the Council, but also the Council can dismiss the President. Thus I agree with you on this, but please find sources!

I agreed with you on most things. I hope you will agree on "regional government" (an expression used also by Barbera and Fusaro when speaking of the governments of Italian regions) and "regional ministers" (clearer than the obscure "aldermen"). I tried to understand, but I don't think that Google Translator or Word Reference can help us with these translations: "regional councillor" would be confusing, "regional alderman" is used only related to municipal politics in some Anglo-Saxon countries... only "regional minister" is really OK. Wikipedia has some customs and some rules we need to comply with. See for instance how Catalan consejeros are translated from es.Wiki to en.Wiki... --Checco (talk) 17:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ps: I will draft a compromise version of this article and of the template (including some of your concers as well as mine). Please, start an account and log in!

Hi Checco! For the general difference between PR and SMPR, I suggest you this link [1]: I underline the fact that in a PR system, The terms of the chief executive and the legislative assembly are fixed, and not subject to mutual confidence (page 2): this is not the case of Italian regions. Italian regions can be paired with French Fifth Republic in page 3 divisions: both two are in the top right position, because the executive is direct elected but depends by the assembly.

Speaking about the other problem, I think you know there are many sources about regional presidents styled as "Governors", but using this term would transform this encyclopedia into a tabloid. I understand your problems about the term "Alderman", even if it is the litteral translation. But what I definetely oppose, is to use the term "Minister", because "ministry" is a well-defined term worldwide, and here we are not speaking about ministries (a ministry is a legal person, Italian assessorati do not: informally speaking, we can consider the Region "in-bloc" as a ministry). I don't want to impose the term "Alderman", but I definetely oppose "minister". I suggest to use the American-style couple "Regional Administration" - Secretary for..." for Giunta Regionale and Assessore, but I am open to all solutions excluding "minister". NumberOne--79.24.129.86 (talk) 14:18, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have to add as a native English speaker that the term "alderman" is rather archaic term in Anglophone circles, usually for ceremonial roles (at least in Britain), so it would not be in the best interest to use that translation on an international wiki. 'Regional minister' seems to be the most 'general' English translation currently suggested, unless a better suggestion arises.--Autospark (talk) 01:03, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear IP, "regional government" and "regional ministers" are in fact the most correct and uncontroversial terms we should use in our case. "Administration" and "sectrearies" are not that used and I consider your argument ludicrous, as departments at the head of which there is a secretary have legal person both in the United States and the United Kingdom! Instead of using obscure or controversial terms we should use the most simple and obvious translations: "regional government" and "regional ministers", as it has been done with Catalan consejeros and in similar cases.

I sincerely appreciate most of your edits and I am glad to see someone working on those articles, but I want to tell you that you can't impose your own view always. Your job in en.Wiki is fairly good, but you should learn to listen to other users and to stick to Wikipedia rules, guidelines and unwritten customs. Consistency is important when writing an encyclopedia.

I will enjoy your help and I will continue to appreciate most of what you diligently do, but I will rollback those changes I don't agree with and that are in contrast with Wikipedia guidelines and customs as well. --Checco (talk) 15:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Checco, English language is wider than you think. Mike Bongiorno said that knowing one thousand words is sufficient to speak a language, and it seems like if you want to build wikipedia over those 1,000 words. But English has a 50% more words Italian language. I appreciate your "Cabinet" for "Giunta" and I will use it.
You should not make a great shuffling of different situations: Catalan councillors can be called ministers because they have a single office ruling a single department with a legal personality which is separated from general autonomous community. This is not a problem of translation: the problem is to understand what an assessor is. And the goal of an encyclopedia is to explain it, not to give an operetta image of how Italy is ruled.
I had a little tour within wikipedia. Look at this confusing template [2] : how much users can understand that Monsieur Queyranne is the president of the Regional Council, and not of that unidentified "Government" (and using "Gov." for French Regions sounds even worse than for Italian ones)? I don't want make revolutions in wikipedia: I want to help some pages, creating pages which could explain some facts that people do not know. --79.54.153.133 (talk) 22:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are making revolutions and you're doing quite a good job in most cases (and I sincerely appreciate that), but it is you who sometimes use operetta translations, not to mention your use of American terms which you should avoid in order not to confuse readers. "Cabinet" is not OK with me: "goverment" is a more general and simpler translation and you should stick to it (did you read what Autospark wrote?). Same thing for "minister". Please be more keen on compromise and stop imposing your views. --Checco (talk) 17:59, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Electoral law

Two more issues for you:

a) I understand the ratio that led you to move "Italian general election in Lombardy" articles to "Italian Senate election in Lombardy" articles, but we need a title that could well include also the race for the Chamber of Deputies... What do you think on this?

b) I did some research on the Tatarellum law used in several regions, including Lombardy. You wrote that "If a coalition wins more than 60% of votes, as happened during the 2000 election, only 8 candidates from the regional list will be chosen and the number of those elected in provincial constituencies will be 72". That is not true. Actually this happens when a coalition wins 50% of the total seats in the Council with proprortional representation (see a very simple explanation here). This is what happened for instance in the Marche in 2005: the centre-left won 57.6% of the vote and 20 seats with PR and, thus, only 4 candidates in the regional list out of 8 were elected. I will correct this.

--Checco (talk) 18:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This source and especially this one tell a different story... I won't rollback again your edit, but please take a look to these two sources. Anyway, you're the expert, so I'm sure you're correct. --Checco (talk) 20:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Piazza Lombardia della Regione Lombardia 1.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:55, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]