Talk:Villa Medici at Cafaggiolo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Why has this page been moved from it's proper name to a new title, with no consultation? Giano (talk) 15:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to fully descriptive Villa Medici at Cafaggiolo, on analogy with Villa Medici at Careggi etc. Yes? --Wetman (talk) 15:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK.. is better. Giano (talk) 15:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is the villa called "Villa Medici" which happens to be in Cafaggiolo, or is it a medicean villa, as in the Italian Wikipedia [1]? I orientated myself towards the Italian Wiki when I moved it. If it's an adjective, then it needs to get out, if the villa is indeed called Medici, then the name is fine. Gryffindor 21:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is the Villa Medicea di Cafaggiolo. However, the new Anglicised name will do. It has to have Medici in the name or else it could be any one of many villas thrown up in Tuscany by second hand auto dealers up on their luck. Giano (talk) 21:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So you are saying that it should be "Villa Medici di Castello" for example? Gryffindor 21:49, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No! It is Villa Medicea or Castello Mediceo di Cafaggiolo, you have to have the gender correct. Leave it as Wetman has it, or this is gouing to be very confused. Whatever you decide you cannot loose the Medici. Giano (talk) 21:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Again, if the name of the villa is "Villa Medici" at such and such place, then it's fine. However in cases where the villa clearly has another name, the adjective "medicea" needs to go, or be translated into English. Also I am not sure about this case here Villa Demidoff. Case for a rename? Gryffindor 22:05, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
you are sailing in very tricky waters indeed. I would not go there, for instance - Villa Capra or Villa Almerico-Valmarana or just La Rotonda which of course turns out to be Villa Capra "La Rotonda". My advice is to go with common usage and not dig too deeply because there will never be a concencus on this one. Giano (talk) 22:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well that is exactly my point: what is the most common usage here? The Italian Wiki has it wrong? How should we determine this? Gryffindor 22:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where ever it stays, someone needs to deal with the double and treble redirects:

-- Theramin (talk) 21:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Gryffindor 22:05, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Giano speaks sense. The "right" title at Wikipedia is the one which a well-prepared reader of Wikipedia will enter in the "search" function. Correctness can be addressed at an early point in the article, preferably in a footnote, not to interrupt more interesting flow. Ages ago, I made a redirect "Mme de Sevigné", because that's what I would have searched: the excruciatingly correct actual article title in that case is a hobbyist's daydream, eh! --Wetman (talk) 00:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gryffindor, you do understand the significance of the Medici? It is not an adjective as such, but the name of Tuscany's Grand Ducal Family. That is one of the cheif and most important factors in making the villa notavle and of interest. While I agrre people may not search for Medicea, they certainly will for Medici. It is imperative that a Medici villa or palazzo has the name in its title. No one would ever drop the Medici. The Italian Wikipedia is correct with its title. Giano (talk) 16:17, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Villa Medici at Cafaggiolo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]