Talk:Brothers of Italy/Archive 1

Broken lede/infobox
Can someone take a look at the lede? Parts of the infobox have spilled out, probably since there is an error in one of the references concerning the 'Position' field. At first I seemed to fix it by adding a in the end, but then it started to delete a part of the first sentence of the lede until the word 'party'. Ivario (talk) 12:24, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Never mind, found the problem with an extra '}}'. :) Ivario (talk) 12:27, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I restored the older version: stuff was removed from the infobox without any explanation. --Ritchie92 (talk) 13:54, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Removing "neo-fascist" assertion
Since its introduction a couple years ago, the "neo fascist" description in the sidebar has been controversial, and prompted many edit back-and-forths.

For example, IP 195.176.178.184 noted: I am far from being connected with any party in Italy, but if something is wrong I simply correct it. The leader herself proved that fascists and such are banned from the party. Please do your own researches before accusing and defame people: https://www.ilriformista.it/giorgia-meloni-non-ce-il-fascismo-nel-dna-di-fratelli-ditalia-nostalgici-sono-idioti-utili-alla-sinistra-253131/

@MaxS 33 noted: Mostly slanderous assertions. No evidence was provided that the party as a whole embraces Fascism or a return to Fascism.

Having looked at the sources, I see they are historical, and they fail to show that the party as a whole currently, or even recently, holds this ideology.

Considering the above points, I think the historical discussion on neo-fascism in the body of the article is appropriate, but that listing it in the sidebar regarding their present ideology is not. CC @Yakme 72.94.80.4 (talk) 14:43, 21 July 2022 (UTC)


 * The cited books are relatively recent, going as recent as 2021, and they call the Fratelli d'Italia party as "the neo-fascist Fratelli d'Italia". This appears in multiple instances in academic literature, so I think this amounts to enough reasons to have "neo-fascism" in the list of ideologies. It is fine not to have it among the main ideologies, but below "Factions". PS: the fact that the leader of the party itself said something about the party ideology does not constitute a reliable source for Wikipedia to prove anything about the ideology. Yakme (talk) 15:01, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Neo-fascism should stay in the infobox because reliable sources had described it in a such way. Regarding whether its position in the main part or in the factions is OR, if reliable sources consider "neo-fascism" to be a faction of the party then it can stay there. If FdI is directly described as neo-fascist then it'll have to be moved in the main part. Vacant0 (talk) 15:09, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I've also inserted three reliable sources that describe the party as "right-wing". Previous sources were copied from ECR's page. (There are also three more sources from 2017 and 2018 that had described the party as right-wing in the Ideology and factions section) Vacant0 (talk) 15:11, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The argument is not that the leader said something, but rather that a reliable source (Italian newspaper) reported on how fascists are banned from the party. This should at least be covered in the body of the article, in the section about fascism.
 * The the sources fail to back up their assertion for the party being this way. Simply a "drive by accusation" with the only substantive backing referring to decades ago, should not suffice, especially when it contradict self-description and many other sources which do not describe them this way. 72.94.80.4 (talk) 01:27, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Question: do multiple reliable sources (mostly academic ones) define FdI as "neo-fascist"? Answer: yes. Therefore WP should mention this in the article's body and in the infobox given the amount of sources supporting the statement.
 * a reliable source (Italian newspaper) reported on how fascists are banned from the party Not true, the newspaper reported that the party leader said that fascists are banned from the party. Nobody actually independently verified that this is true, in fact actually there were important news investigations in the latest year about how many actual fascists were inside the FdI party structure, especially in Milan (see and, translated in English here). Yakme (talk) 07:55, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

The party is surely national-conservative and, on some respects, nationalist, but it is not neo-fascist. --Checco (talk) 04:44, 22 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Reliable news and academic sources had also described FdI as neo-fascist. Vacant0 (talk) 14:41, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The journalists claiming so have very little knowledge of Italian politics and show it very clearly. The thing is that "Brothers of Italy" actually descends (through 3-4 other parties) from Mussolini's fascist party, but today it's not fascist nor neo/post-fascist. That's the wonder of Italian politics for your. Barjimoa (talk) 08:38, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * FYI "academic sources had also described FdI as neo-fascist". Vacant0 (talk) 12:48, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It plainly is neofascist. The fact that Meloni and some others are at pains to deny that they are neofascist just proves that they understand the political need to give themselves plausible deniability; Fascists are attracted to their banner no matter how much they deny it, and Italians who are not enamored of fascism may be prepared to take those denials at face value. FdI is the heir of the defunct AN, which was the heir of the defunct MSI. It's not complicated...except in the telling of Italian fascist apologists who show up here to sow confusion and faux doubt ("I am far from being connected with any party in Italy..." ha ha ha, no of course you aren't which is why you felt the need to tell us that). Italians who are well informed state without any hesitation that FdI are fascist. It's considered a fact, a major feature of the political landscape there. 72.86.132.35 (talk) 05:36, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes. All the current RS news sources I see acknowledge the party's move away from fascism. See my comment below. Seems we should remove from the infobar. 213.134.163.148 (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Not only I am not connected to FdI, but I am quite oppose to it, especially as a proud Venetian and European federalist. However, it is very inaccurate to describe the party as neo-fascist. Truly, it is a modern conservative party, whose roots lie in the national-conservative AN, whose roots lie in the post-fascist MSI. At best, FdI is a post-post-post-fascist party, surely not a neo-fascist one. Surely, some of the very few people in Italy who are still fascist in their hearts vote for FdI, but that does not make FdI neo-fascist by any mean. After all, also some leading members, let alone several supporters, of the centre-left PD still consider themselves "communist". A further argument is that people describing themselves as "fascist" or "communist" in Italy refer to a political tradition more than a specific ideology. --Checco (talk) 13:18, 8 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Hilarious tell you have there, Checco ... describing MSI as post-fascist. I've never known an Italian who described MSI as anything other than straightforwardly "fascist". Though I wouldn't be surprised to learn that MSI supporters denied in public that they were fascist - just as many FdI try to convince the public that they're "post fascist", whatever in the world that's supposed to mean. It's a little bit like being "post sociopathic" isn't it?
 * It's also rather revealing that you're trying to liken fascists with Italian communists. I knew lots of Italian communists when their party was ascendant decades ago, and not one of them ever supported violence or terrorism as a means to take over the country. They weren't egging goons on to beat up and kill immigrants in the streets. Italian communists first and foremost saw themselves as the main bulwark against a resurgence of fascism.
 * You also contradict yourself when you claim that both fascists and communists define themselves by "tradition" rather than ideology - when you've already admitted that some groups other than the FdI such as Casa Pound are indeed openly fascists. 72.86.132.106 (talk) 02:18, 9 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Surely, fringe groups in Italy can be considered nostalgic of fascism (the tradition more than the regime itself) or neo-fascist. We are not talking about those groups here. FdI, like it or not (and I do not like the party at all) is a mainstream conservative party, whose members come mostly from the post-post-fascist AN (which was also a mainstream and broad-church conservative party) and former Christian Democrats. You are right when you say that "Italian communists first and foremost saw themselves as the main bulwark against a resurgence of fascism"; on the other side, the MSI saw istelf mainly as a bulwark against communism and was indeed a keep supporter of Italy's participation in the NATO alliance. History and reality are more complicate than how you put them. --Checco (talk) 05:38, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The reality is that (a) fascists are not only members of FdI, but indeed are high ranking officials in the party; and (b) that FdI officials deny officially that any fascists are members of the party and claim that they are banned from membership. So FdI is officially committed to lying about its fascism. And here you keep coming - for more than a decade - insisting again and again and again in the face of all the evidence to the contrary that FdI cannot possibly be said to be fascist. It's almost as if you were lying as well, just like the FdI folks you say you do not support. The lovely "tradition" of fascism is...wait for it...fascism. Only fascists are attracted to that "tradition". 72.86.136.4 (talk) 20:35, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Here is a current statement from a reliable source, per Wiki's perennial sources list, describing FdI as "post-Fascist", as Checco describes. While the historical discussion is valid, the infobar is clearly outdated, and has not kept up with changes in the party: https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220724-brothers-of-italy-the-far-right-party-on-the-cusp-of-power A second RS here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/07/26/italy-meloni-post-fascists/ In light of these RS's, I motion that we remove fascism from the infobar, and add a sentence based on these sources to the section which discusses the party's history with fascism in the past. 213.134.163.148 (talk) 13:47, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

So, I haven’t established a few on either side of this debate. However, what's important to distinguish which may have been overlooked is if neo-fascism is included, should it be just under the ideology section, or as currently stated the factions section? I say this because one source - which I have since removed - called the party post-fascist, but didn’t say it was a faction of the party, therefore violating WP:SYNTH as the claim in the infobox currently is that this ideology is only a faction within the party. Can anyone say whether the other citations currently given for neo-fascism in the infobox explicitly state in them that the ideology is a faction within the party? If not, it should be moved out of this section and placed under the main ideologies. I'm unable to view or verify the sources or their claims as I don't have the books and can't see a way to preview them in the areas these claims are made within them. Helper201 (talk) 21:10, 10 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Considering that you had added these scholar references for neo-fascism, can you tell us do the sources mention "neo-fascism" as a faction inside FdI or do they directly describe FdI as neo-fascist? I've found a number of news and scholar sources that describe it directly as neo-fascist. Vacant0 (talk) 13:24, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * , I don't recall for sure but, in case you missed it, here I went through those refs. I believe it was structured that way because other sources used 'National conservative' and 'Right-wing popoulist' label, so I suppose it was put that way to include both more moderate and more radical factions, and the body discussed its neo-fascist links. Either way, I agree that if a significant number of sources describe it directly as neo-fascist, it shouldn't be considered a faction unless they say so; perhaps we may put a note to mention those who use 'neo-fascist' and those who use 'post-fascist' as labels—it shouldn't be a big deal, as Post-fascism ("applied to several European political parties which espouse a modified form of fascism and participate in constitutional politics") redirects to Neo-fascism anyway. Davide King (talk) 14:55, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Interesting. I've found this work for example. Here's a quote from it: "Secondly, at the local level, the party has never failed to flaunt its sympathy towards nostalgia of fascism during (online) public assemblies of representative bodies." Additionally, from what I have at least found, scholars directly describe it as neo-fascist or post-fascist. I haven't found one source yet where it mentions that neo-fascism/post-fascism is a faction inside the party. I think that moving that ideology out of the factions part would be controversial, but considering that no sources claim it as a faction, we'll have to do it. Are you in favor of calling a RfC in order to solve this out or do you think that this should be boldly moved? Vacant0 (talk) 15:40, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd want to hear opinions from others about this. Vacant0 (talk) 12:42, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The party is not neo-fascist and has no neo-fascist factions, even though some of its members may be somewhat nostalgic of the fascist tradition. It is already a long shot having "neo-fascism" as factional ideology, while the party is a mainstream conservative party, with national-conservative and right-wing populist elements. --Checco (talk) 19:21, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Do you have any sources that claim that FdI isn't neo-fascist and that it doesn't have any neo-fascist factions? Vacant0 (talk) 19:43, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * There is no need of sources stating that FdI is not neo-fascist or, for that matter, that the PD is not communist. Of course, there is plenty of sources describing FdI as conservative, while the sources claiming that it is neo-fascist are not very authoritative, in my view. Just think that its members were previously affiliated with the EPP and now with ECR. --Checco (talk) 20:18, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The party definitely has some neo-fascist factions or neo-fascist prominent members (MEP Carlo Fidanza for example), as shown in the Fanpage investigation that I already linked above in this thread. Party leader Meloni even refused to kick out the openly neo-fascist members from the party, so it looks like a quite tolerated ideology within the party. Some more fascism-related instances include a celebration of the march on Rome in Ascoli Piceno made by FdI party members in 2019 (here) and the Roman salute picture of the Naples' FdI section in 2021 (here). There are definitely more such events if one looks in the news. So at the very least, neo-fascist as a faction ideology should be included. However, since multiple academic sources (definitely more authoritative than news articles) decide to portray FdI in general as neo-fascist, we cannot just ignore this, and we should consider having it among the main ideologies of the party, instead of just as a faction ideology. Yakme (talk) 07:32, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

sorry, I see your good faith, and I am in principle not against your latest edits, but why are you not waiting a bit for the end of this discussion to change what's written in the ideologies in the infobox? I think we can come to a solution about this on this talk page, instead of by bold editing, especially given that a discussion is already ongoing and was waiting for discussion input to act on this. With edits like this one and this one you are sort of bypassing the future outcome of this discussion. I honestly would have reverted your edits but it's hard to do automatically because of several intermediate edits. Yakme (talk) 06:57, 14 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Considering that reliable sources, including news and scholar sources, had described FdI as neo-fascist, I think it deserves to be included as one of the main ideologies. Davide King already gave his opinions on the label, and I think that the infobox should remain like this. Vacant0 (talk) 09:40, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Should we add a comment in the infobox in order to let other editors know to not remove the label? Vacant0 (talk) 10:00, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I strongly disagree with the latest changes made in the infobox: equating FdI with neo-fascist parties such as New Force and CasaPound is a prejudicial and approximate mistake. Undoubtedly there are neofascist factions in Brothers of Italy, and this must rightly be reported in the infobox. But indicating FdI as an entirely neo-fascist party is a big mistake. Giorgia Meloni is not neo-fascist, nor a large part of the party's ruling class. It does not seem objective to me to attribute an ideology belonging to a minority to the entire party ( especially in the pre-electoral period ), I ask that the previous situation be restored. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 16:27, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Personally, I agree, and I would be fine either way but we must go with WP:RS. I think the other user had a point that we should not engage in WP:SYNTH; we need sources explicitily saying neo-fascism is a faction, and academic sources I found for neo-fascism simply say "neo-fascist", no mention of it being a faction; they also go from 2015 to 2021 (I was not able to put a page for each one because Google Books did not show the exact page but I remember they used the "neo-fascist" label or "neo-fascism" without mention of it being a faction). It is not much different from MSI's infobox of "Neo-fascism", "National conservatism", and "Nationalism"; the only difference is FdI also has "Right-wing populism" and is described as "Right-wing to far-right" rather than "Far-right", with the note explaining academic usage of the "radical right" label. I'm not sure whether there is a consensus in academia, and when there isn't one, we report the various views; we have academic sources for all three labels, so it's difficult. Despite my attempts years ago to actually have a "Faction" section in the infobox, they went nowhere, and I've come not to like that we creake madeup parameters like that. It could also be that "neo-fascism" is used in a broader sense including "Post-fascism" (European political parties espousing a modified form of fascism through participation in constitutional politics (e.g. FdI), and the more radical "Neo-fascism" (e.g. CasaPound), which is how the "Neo-fascism" article is structured. Davide King (talk) 17:59, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Meloni herself has a fascist track record and has said she's comfortable with the fascist past. She and others in FdI speak out of both sides of their mouths wrt the party's self-evident evocation of MSI and of Mussolini's fascism. A lot of their fascist messaging is via dog-whistles (such as using the tricolor flame emblem), which they continue to use even as they try to dissuade non-fascists from looking too closely at what they actually represent. And what they represent is hatred, bigotry, demagoguery, and faux-populism behind the guise of extreme nationalism. That's a pretty good description of core fascism. This article ought should not be ignored: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/11/scepticism-over-giorgia-melonis-claims-fascism-is-history-in-italian-far-right 72.86.132.54 (talk) 15:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * There's also this, arguing that Meloni is actually shifting her party back to its 1930 roots during the current campaign, as much as she makes noises about rejecting that for the Italians fearful of those roots. https://www.ft.com/content/f8c32044-0d92-11e8-8eb7-42f857ea9f09 72.86.132.54 (talk) 15:09, 15 August 2022 (UTC)


 * The party does not include organised neo-fascist factions, but I can live with citing it in the section on ideology and factions. I strongly oppose describing the party, which is a mainstream conservative party with a national-conservative outlook and right-wing populist instincts, as neo-fascist as a whole. The party is not even far-right. As it was argued, FdI cannot be confused with fringe far-right parties like New Force or Tricolour Flame. --Checco (talk) 18:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @Davide King But FdI is different from MSI: the Italian Social Movement was openly fascist, and this is certainly not the case with FdI. I am not saying to not consider authoritative sources (even if I am not able to read the precise content of those books), but that they must also be balanced with other sources and with the reality of the facts: the reality of the facts tells us that there are some neo-fascists fringes in FdI, but they are a minority. The electoral program and the political line of FdI is not neo-fascist, it is an objective fact, I think you can agree with me. This is why I say that it is a mistake to generically indicate this party as "neo-fascist" in the infobox, because it seems that it is truly the main ideology of the party, while it is not. The wording "Factions" in the infobox may seem like a forcing, but in some cases (like this one) it is necessary (to show all the different points of view).--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 19:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Considering that there are no sources that mention neo-fascism as a faction, would this be alright then? It's still in the infobox, although it is included in the footnote. Vacant0 (talk) 09:53, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I've added another reference for "euroscepticism", although I would prefer if we remove it because it isn't an ideology. Vacant0 (talk) 13:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Not true - there are lots of current sources that draw attention to neo-fascists active and in leadership positions in the FdI. 72.86.132.54 (talk) 15:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @Vacant0 I support your edit. I think that Euroscepticism can be stay in the infobox, it is also often indicated in the infoboxes of other parties. Just one consideration: the term additionally in that context is not entirely correct, as the statement on neo-fascism is in opposition to the previous statement (right-wing democratic party), so an adverb like "however" is better.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 20:21, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

I am not completely satisfied, and somehow I think that neo-fascism should be stressed more. At the moment, looking at the Infobox, we have 3 academic sources for "national-conservative", 2 academic sources for "Euroscepticism", 1 academic source for "right-wing populist", and 6 for "neo-fascism", and yet we show primarily the first three ideology, and hide the last one in a footnote. It looks unbalanced. Yakme (talk) 20:08, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

the student wing of the party is openly neo-fascist so bring it back at once, leading Faction leaders are also public neo-fascists Ghostangel1 (talk) 21:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Personally it seemed like a good compromise, as the infobox included all points of view. I am not convinced by the edit of Ghostangel1: in en.wikipedia we do not have an article on post-fascism, which is currently a redirect to neo-fascism (but they are two different things). Other sources could be found on other ideologies to balance all ideologies. Either an article about post-fascism like the one in it.wikipedia is created, or it should be removed from the infobox...--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 07:44, 17 August 2022 (UTC)


 * There are simply not enough academic sources on the definition of "post-fascism" as an ideology. Post-fascism is an attribute for the political transition phase of some neo-fascist movements and parties, and can be left as a redirect to neo-fascism. As I see it, it was a way for fascist ideologies to say "we are not fascists, we are post (from Latin: after) fascism, so we are ahead of it, we put fascism in our past". Anyway, I still do not see why we have 6 academic sources attributing "neo-fascist" to FdI, and we have "post-fascist" in the infobox. Yakme (talk) 08:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Considering these disputes, I think that a RfC would settle this down. Vacant0 (talk) 09:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I also think that a RFC would be a good way to resolve the discussion.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 15:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I've started the RfC, if there are any possible options that could be included besides the ones that I added, let me know. Vacant0 (talk) 16:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

lede: does brothers of italy support liberal democracy?
or does it support Illiberal democracy like fidesz under orban? Gooduserdude (talk) 09:35, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * the reason i reverted several times was due to that i wanted to correct my edit summary Gooduserdude (talk) 08:00, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * the National Alliance (Italy) might have embraced liberal democracy in 1995, but the current wording in the lead implies that the current party supports liberal democracy while the party has more in common ideologically with fidesz under orban (and therefore supports Illiberal democracy), maybe someone could clarify this in the lead (or remove the whole last sentence in the lead like i did) Gooduserdude (talk) 08:26, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

In a meeting of 1995, the National Alliance officially abandoned neo-fascism and embraced the values of liberal democracy. In fact, that's why the Social Movement changed its name to National Alliance. Also, technically Meloni doesn't align with Orban (albeit she is friends with him) but rather with the US Republican party and the European conservative group. However, perhaps the best solution is to remove "Liberal" and leave only "but abandoned neo-fascism and embraced democracy in 1995" if that's an issue.Barjimoa (talk) 08:30, 3 August 2022 (UTC)


 * AN did abandon neo-fascism. I've found a couple of sources regarding illiberal democracy, although they rather mention "illiberal politics of Meloni", and not directly the party itself. Vacant0 (talk) 13:07, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd also add that self-descriptors in these cases do not matter. Meloni describes herself as a "centre-right" politician, a descriptor that is not used by reliable sources. --Vacant0 (talk) 16:36, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @User:Vacant0 on your talkpage, you considered WP:UNDUE to include the sentence "but abandoned neo-fascism and post-fascism in 1995." lets just remove the sentence, it is the best and most simple solution, but because i already got reverted myself, i request you to remove it, so i dont break WP:3RR Gooduserdude (talk) 16:14, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * And Fini, who proudly described himself as "fascist" while head of the MSI, was still the head of the AN. Why would anybody fall for such a blatant rebranding operation? I think one would have to be a fool to take at face value the semantic games played by fascists. Mussolini himself tried to portray himself as a respectable politician working within the accepted norms - before he could install one-party rule. 72.86.132.54 (talk) 22:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * personally id prefer this version https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brothers_of_Italy&oldid=1101701395 Gooduserdude (talk) 16:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The US Republican party is itself increasingly illiberal in the policies it promotes. It has long had a range of official and semi-official policies whose purpose is to limit or eliminate the ability of non-Republican supporters to vote in elections (it was under a federal court order for decades prohibiting it from using some of those tactics), and its gerrymandering of national and state voting districts has reached a point in multiple states where it can virtually assure its dominance of government however the public votes. It has also enacted various policies that prevent the reinstatement of voters wrongly excluded from voting, even when backed by legislation and/or referenda. That is by any normal definition an endorsement of illiberal (or "managed") democracy, such as Orban's regime in Hungary or the 70+ years of one-party rule by the PRI in Mexico. 72.86.132.54 (talk) 14:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The US Republican party is itself increasingly illiberal in the policies it promotes. It has long had a range of official and semi-official policies whose purpose is to limit or eliminate the ability of non-Republican supporters to vote in elections (it was under a federal court order for decades prohibiting it from using some of those tactics), and its gerrymandering of national and state voting districts has reached a point in multiple states where it can virtually assure its dominance of government however the public votes. It has also enacted various policies that prevent the reinstatement of voters wrongly excluded from voting, even when backed by legislation and/or referenda. That is by any normal definition an endorsement of illiberal (or "managed") democracy, such as Orban's regime in Hungary or the 70+ years of one-party rule by the PRI in Mexico. 72.86.132.54 (talk) 14:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Brothers of Italy
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Brothers of Italy's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Kirby 2022": From Giorgia Meloni:  From 2022 Italian general election:  

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I fixed it. Yakme (talk) 09:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Selective refs?
Change "right-wing populist" to "far-right". Literally the evolution of historic fascism, and it's supposed to not be far-right? And no, putting it in some small font in a box isn't an adequate substitute to putting it on the first line. Also, 'populist' means nothing, practically... not even sure why anyone uses it anymore, being some kind of a magic trick... but the fact it's the word that replaced what would adequately describe it makes it ludicrous. Also, there's LOTS of refs out there describing it as far-right, including many on huffpost itself (1 of the 3 refs present now)... so, really, nobody can argue this is due to refs, as clearly they're being selected intentionally (and if I should presume there's many more that have the 'far' than not). I noticed exactly this being done on the Sweden Democrats page too, and it just so seems like there's some PR being done by the parties themselves, possibly (or their voters, of course)... as an encyclopedia a spade should be a spade, not a "really-a-bit-central-but-right-and-supposedly-doing-what-the-voters-want-but-in-reality-as-usual-a-tale-of-greed" etc... also a bit strange that this page was debating whether the evolution of historic fascism is neo-fascist... if it's not then what is? Like, it's one thing for random comments on social media to randomly try to gaslight, but how could an encyclopedia make an effort (contrary to many reliable refs, mind) to pretend fascist parties don't exist anymore and somehow they're all sensible people who just want a little genocide...? It's not like sources everywhere aren't calling them far-right, so it's not like people elsewhere will miss it, but surely this site should reflect that...? 80.42.140.247 (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Semi-protection-unlocked.svg Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Aidan9382 (talk) 19:00, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Post-fascism
Italian wiki which obviously knows better than we do have post-fascism in ideology section and with Edits locked. Sort it out i am friends with loads of members who are neo and post-fascists and they want a moderate constitutional variant of fascism thats what they say amongst themselves. Publicly they deny this to appeal to more voters but they constantly signal post-fascism to its voters to assure them that that they still follow the Italian Social Movement tradition of the social right. Ghostangel1 (talk) 17:14, 17 August 2022 (UTC)


 * There is an ongoing RfC above, you can give your opinion about it there. Vacant0 (talk) 21:01, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * "Post-fascism" is how MSI defined itself as an alternative to "neo-fascism". AN abandoned "neo-fascism" and "post-fascism" and switched to "National Right", which is the current ideology of Borthers of Italy. These terms have precise meanings in Italian politics, let's not make confusion. Barjimoa (talk) 09:17, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It does not work like that, Ghostangel1. Neither what "other Wikipedias" have in their respective article, nor what our own personal experience has been amount to anything of substance. In Wikipedia, sources rule the roost. End of story. If another Wikipedia's article contains more sources than the English Wikipedia, then that is indeed helpful in the sense that we can use those sources here as as well. But this does not mean the Wikipedia article written in the language of the subject's nationality (in this case, Italian) is perforce more reliable than the English Wikipedia article. Again: It's all about sources. For more about my position on the specific subject see above. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 11:33, 18 August 2022 (UTC)


 * left-wing straw man arguments driven by left-wing, marxist hate. By your own logic any party left to the SocialDemocrats is basically a communist party if you just mirror your critical standards you impose on the right of center parties.
 * And wikipedia is clearly not the ministry of truth and never will be. 80.131.56.43 (talk) 02:05, 18 September 2022 (UTC)


 * This is typical WP categorisation argument nonsense. Instead of writing vast tomes on the talk page arguing whether this party is or is not fascist, how about someone writes a small section on this party's key policies, and let the reader sort it out for themselves. Currently this is only a part-article. 14.2.200.220 (talk) 01:31, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

"The" Brothers of Italy?
Definitely not the most common name. See 240,000 hits vs 5 million+ hits. Most times when it's "the Brothers of Italy" it's actually because the text states "the Brothers of Italy party", which might make sense. Otherwise, as a proper name it does not have the article before it. Yakme (talk) 06:40, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This is one case in which Google hits do not tell the right story. I do not know which English-language newspapers you read, but really the party is mostly referred as "the Brothers of Italy". This said, it is not a big deal to me and I will definitely not infringe the three-revert rule, as you have done, to impose my view. It is really not a big deal, but maybe other users will have their say. I appreciate that you started this thread. --Checco (talk) 06:59, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Guardian and BBC do not use "the", while the NY Times does. Indeed let's see whether other editors have more insight, given that Google hits are not enough apparently.
 * You can't complain about the 3 revert rule if your usual editing strategy is: "I make an edit, someone reverts my edit, and I will revert back until they break the revert rule first". Indeed it's not a mathematical rule: one can be disruptive also with one single revert per day (see for example what you are doing on the Lega article day by day since 17 September). In some cases your behavior, as well as mine, is not among the best standards of WP practice (and from my side I am certainly not proud of it). Yakme (talk) 07:16, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I perfectly know that, despite being rude, you are a honest and co-operative editor. For my part, I am quite consistent: I am always open to debate and compromise, while staunchly supporting Consensus (especially "in discussions of proposals to add, modify, or remove material in articles, a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit"). Thus I backed down on "the" beacause the established version was without "the" and my bold edit was legitimately challenged by you, while I am entitled to revert bold edits that are not supported by consensus or have been challenged by one or more users. --Checco (talk) 08:08, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Coalition with the Italian Liberal Party
"On March 15, 2016, after initial support for Guido Bertolaso's candidacy, she [Giorgia Meloni] was nominated by the center-right for mayor of Rome, with the support of a coalition consisting of Fratelli d'Italia [Brothers of Italy], Noi con Salvini, Partito Liberale Italiano [Italian Liberal Party] and two civic lists."

https://www.ilsecoloxix.it/italia/2022/09/26/news/giorgia-meloni-dalla-garbatella-verso-palazzo-chigi-storia-di-una-ragazza-di-roma-1.41688568

93.45.229.98 (talk) 11:46, 28 June 2023 (UTC)