User talk:Philantonia

Italian American notables

So you reverted my edit of Italian American notables and told me to look see the talk, but I didn't find anything wrong with my edits. Could you please explain me which part you don't agree with. Everyone that I added was pretty much notable and is at least 50 years old. --Yerevanci (talk) 03:56, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

If you have problem with my edits then state them! I asked you and you didn't respond and you're keep reverting my edits. If you have questions, ask them here. I don't see anything wrong with my edits.--Yerevanci (talk) 15:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Philantonia, nobody's trying to vandalize that page. Why don't you discuss first and then add the notables? You're keep pushing your own opinion. Please participate in the discussion and let's settle this. --Yerevanci (talk) 18:10, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Anti-Italianism

Hi Philantonia. I'm going to see if you're true to your word when you say you're interested in "promoting fair and balanced discussions on Italian American history and culture". Your removal of my pointing out that Curtis Sliwa is himself an Italian-American in the "Italian-American Stereotyping" section of the already seriously problematic "Anti-Italianism" article suggests otherwise.The fact that Curtis Sliwa is himself not only an Italian-American but a particularly proud one (he calls attention to his Italian heritage with great pride on an almost daily basis on his radio show) is quite relevant to the suggestion that he is anti-Italian. What got him in trouble of course was the references to the mafia. He has something of an obsession with the mafia because he was allegedly the target of an attempted mob hit. His hostility to the notion of an Italian-American museum wasn't driven by anti-Italian animous but by larger concerns about the growing trend in the US to focus on ethnic identify rather than our shared American heritage. I happen to agree with him on that front. I think the establishment of 'ethnic museums' is divisive, whether they be Italian-American museums or Irish-American museums or African-American museums or what have you.

On a related note, I modified the article on Sliwa himself to remove an innacurate and unreferenced claim that he is part Syrian.He's half Polish and half Italian, but has always identified more strongly with his Italian heritage. He is also originally from Chicago, not Brooklyn as that article states, but have yet to make that correction. He may have been born in Brooklyn, but he spent his early life in Chicago. It must sound like I'm some sort of Sliwa fan; I'm actually not. But I am quite familiar with him having grown up in NYC. I don't think an hour goes by where he doesn't make numerous proud references to his Italian-ness.

Aynway, I will presume in good faith that you are indeed interested in promoting a fair and balanced discussion. Hopefully we can discuss any edits you may have a problem with amicably. CannotFindAName (talk) 15:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll let your latest edit stand for now (i.e. removing the "proud" from the description of Sliwa's Italian heritage). I will put it back with references in due time. I find it interesting that you seem to want to hide the fact that Sliwa is Italian, and indeed an overtly proud one. He has stated this countless times publicly; almost hourly on his radio broadcasts in which he regularly uses Italian expressions and talks about Italian culture. In fact, he overtly states this fact in his letter to the very same Italian-American museum, linked below:

"As you know, I'm a proud descendant of Italian immigrants and can certainly appreciate the difficulties our ancestors went through and have an enormous amount of respect for how they were able to persevere and thrive."

http://www.italystl.com/ra/4248.htm

Anti-Italianism

Hi, can you check out recent (30 March) edits to above article. I don't know enough about the subject. Regards Denisarona (talk) 16:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anti-Italianism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black Hand (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:50, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anti-Italianism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Folgore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:36, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

WP:BRD

Please read this page, which specifically' says that articles under discussion because of a disagreement between editors must stay in the state they were in before the dispute, the status quo ante. Please stop reverting to your preferred version. If and when a consensus of editors agrees with you, then you can make the change. By continuing to revert, you are not only starting to WP:EW, but you are breaking one of the most basic behavioral standards on Wikipedia. Please stop. BMK: Grouchy Realist (talk) 16:33, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Italian American, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Celeste (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Italian American, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sebastian Cabot. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

War World I

WW1 started in Europe in 1914. Italy entered the war in 1915 (not in 1916), the UnIted States in 1917. Already in 1914 (in preparation for the War) and then more so in 1915 (when The war began in Italy) the Italian government began calling back his citizens abroad to serve in the army. Many Italian immigrants, who were not yet American citizen, went back to serve in the Italian Army. Those who were American citizens obviously enrolled in the American Army after 1917 (including Fiorello La Guardia who served in the American Expeditionary Force ). Many Italian American familues had members who served in either the Italian or the American army. Ghinozzi-nissim (talk) 23:20, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

I am not saying that I agree or disagree with you. I simply do not understand why Vincenzo Botta with 40 years of teaching at New York University and an article in Wikipedia) or Gaetano Lanza should be considered less important than Anthony Ghio, mayor of Texarkana, Texas in 1880 (who also does not have any article on Wikipedia)? Could you please answer so I can know what is important and what is not? Why the first Italian American scientist who had a prestigious position at MIT is less important than the obscure mayor of a little village in Texas? I simply would like to understand your criteria--Ghinozzi-nissim (talk) 05:48, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I perfectly agree, but the article as it is now, is not balanced. There are dozens and dozens of names of baseball players, actors and actress, politicians (that the reader can easily find in the categories) and the two of us are discussing and wondering if we should mention just a couple of academics and intellectuals, that in my opinion should be mentioned (though in the shortest and most readable way--I agree [with your experience you can certainly find the most appropriate way]), especially when their role is so important. Vincenzo Botta and Gaetano Lanza were the first Italian Americans to be tenured professors for over 40 (!) years in two of the most prestigious universities of the United States, they had hundreds of students, and published important books. Mentioning their names (as the LaGumina Encyclopedia does) would add something very important for the Italian American experience. Without this, the readers would not know that there were already Italian American academics (scholars and scientists) in American Universities in the 19th century. If we removed some names of sportsmen, politicians and actors in these too many useless lists nothing would change and the article would be much more readable. What do you think?-- Ghinozzi-nissim (talk) 18:32, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Taliaferro

A notable Civil War Confederate general of Italian descent shouldn't be featured on the page? Well I think there's too many singer guys like Sinatra (fair enough, the most notable), Mancini, Como, Martin, too much! Why just recent Southern Italian-descent singers? The Taliaferros were one of the founding families of Virginia/Maryland. The general is notable, I think it makes sense to show this side of the Italian American story too.--2.223.36.196 (talk) 19:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Italian_War

You obviously know your military history. I would like you to know that some individuals have called into question recently published books like "Regio Esercito: The Italian Royal Army in Mussolini's Wars 1935-1943" and "Swastika over the Acropolis" (that rescue the effort of the Italian forces in Albania) in the "talk page" to do with the "Military history of Greece during World War II". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Military_history_of_Greece_during_World_War_II

It's a pity because any positive observations made by the British and Australian authors of these two excellent books will now be considered unreliable and therefore removed from the Wikipedia pages to do with the "Military history of Greece during World War II" and the "Greco-Italian War". As far as I have been able to digest, the Wikipedia censors or contributors in question of clearly Greek heritage, do not accept the fact that the Italians fighting in Albania wore down the Greeks to a great degree, and that the Greek Army left their back door open as a result, allowing the Germans to come rampaging through Greece, because of the Greek military command's obsession with the Italians in Albania.

I hope you or someone you know can talk some sense into these censors or their superiors, maybe deflate their ego a bit and let people use the recent findings in the books "Regio Esercito: The Italian Royal Army in Mussolini's Wars 1935-1943" and "Swastika over the Acropolis" without having them removed as an unreliable source.

Yours sincerely,

Pablo Nero

PS: I wish I could help more but my Italian is very limited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pablonero2015 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 30 March 2015 (UTC) --Pablonero2015 (talk) 02:20, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I see that

you have an interest in Italian-American history, which explains (opinion) how you got to the Piccirilli Brothers. This is an article dear to my heart, I started it about 10 years ago, and in reviewing your recent edits there I discovered that in removing a large section of some redundant material you also removed some projects of theirs that are not mentioned elsewhere in the article. In trying to discover exactly what those were I decided that I would attempt to do a chart or table of their commissions rather than just restoring the commissions that were left out. That would allow us (if you are still interested in these guys) to organize and present the material in a more organized manner. I also have another fine Italian American sculptor, Corrado Parducci under my wing, please feel free to check him out. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 17:16, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

April 2015

Your recent editing history at Italian American shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — MusikAnimal ^talk 01:41, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Italophilia

Hi, Philantonia. I appreciate your contributions to the article Italophilia and your comments to user Reedy. I have added something in the talk page of the article Italophilia about Shakespeare. Reedy seems one of those who cannot "tolerate" a possible Sicilian (or Italian) alternative candidate in the Shakespeare authorship question....may be we need to write something about? Regards, B. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.252.126.13 (talk) 17:01, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Italophilia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alberti. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for all your hard work around here. Rosekelleher (talk) 13:57, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Philantonia. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Philantonia. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Philantonia. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

"Three regiments..." statement in 'Italian Americans' article

Hello Sir,

Regarding my application of the ‘citation needed’ tag to the statement, in the ‘War of Independence to Civil War (1775-1861)’ of the ‘Italian Americans’ article. I applied the tag to a sentence that said: “Three regiments, totaling some 1,500 men, fought for American independence.” You responded to this by deleting the tag and (inadvertently?) altering the original statement so that, instead of saying, “totaling 1,500 men”, it said, “totaling 2,500 men”). I have (provisionally) re-applied the tag but I felt that I ought to explain my reason for so doing.

Although, over more years than I care to remember, I have studied the military side of the American War of Independence, I am completely unaware of the existence of any such regiments. However, I did not apply the ‘citation needed’ tag merely for that reason because I do not presume to know everything that there is to know about the subject: indeed, a great pleasure in studying history is in constantly finding out new things. I applied the tag because every statement made in a Wikipedia article must be supported by a citation from a reliable source. Any statement that is not reliably sourced has to be removed. That is official Wikipedia policy. That is why I applied the ‘citation needed’ tag and that is why, if no reliable source is provided for said claim within a reasonable time period, it will have to be removed. I noticed that, on August 17, 2019, you deleted a sentence from the ‘Anti-Italianism’ section of the article and left as an edit summary, “Removed unsourced and overly broad statement”. You were absolutely correct to do this because that is precisely the action prescribed by Wikipedia policy with regard to unsourced statements. I applied the ‘citation needed’ tag to the “Three regiments, totaling some 1,500 [or 2,500] men” claim for the same reason. If you can supply a reliable source for any regiments of Italian or Italian-American troops participating in the American War of Independence, then please do so. If there were entire units of Italian Americans involved in the Revolutionary War, I am sure that many readers would be very interested in finding out more about them - from which states they came, in which theaters they served, etc. I have scoured the Internet and found much interesting information on the Italian American contribution to American independence, such as the article, "The Italian American contributions to the American Revolutionary War", by Maria Gloria, in, 'L'Italo Americano', but as far as units consisting entirely or predominantly of Italians or Italian Americans, I have drawn a blank. This is in contrast to the participation of the 39th New York Volunteer Regiment of Infantry ("Garibaldi Guard") in the Civil War: which is well-documented.

Best wishes,

Flondolfo (talk) 23:58, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I am talking to you today in tegards to your removal of my edit on the italian American article. None of these artists were mentioned anywhere on the article and there is no mention of italian american entertainers in the late 20th and 21st century. Talk show hosts and other entertainers from other periods are mentioned in other parts of the article. I believe my edit is significant, all three of those artists are very significant italian americans in the present time and should be included. If plan on restoring my edit. It appears you are putting your personal opinions above the point in collaborating to make the article appropriate for the reader. It also appears this is not the first time this has happened with your account on this specific article. I will report you if this continues.

Best wishes, Koala234 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koala234 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I have given you two weeks to respond however I have not received a response. I will revert your edit at this time. Please comment on my page for any further questions or discussion. Thank you, Koala234 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koala234 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

July 2022

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as at Talk:Italian Americans, (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 00:13, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)