Talk:List of prime ministers of Italy/Archive 1

Listing of consecutive governments
Should we list separate but consecutive governments separately? De Gasperi was prime minister without a break between 1945 and 1953, no matter how many different governments he led. List of Prime Ministers of France, for instance, does not list separate governments separately, nor does Chancellor of Germany (although, I would admit, this page might give more detail). john k 20:50, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I think we should if there was an actual change in the government. In theory the Mussolini government was a succession of many governments over different parliaments, but of course elections did not change much in those times - so it's correct to list it as one. However, different governments can have the same president and little more. Orzetto 21:26, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

In parliamentary systems, it is not necessarily elections that determine how many governments there are. It is the resignation of the government and its reappointment. Certainly governments frequently end without elections, and in many countries, at least, can last through elections (Clemenceau, for instance, had one government which lasted from before through after the 1919 elections). That said, this is a list of prime ministers, and not a list of governments. A list of governments would be an appropriate thing to have. But that's not what this is a list of. john k 00:53, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I edited the page to account for Berlusconi's resignation and the fact that he will form a new government with the same coalition partners. However, the date of the beginning of the 3rd Berlusconi government needs to be changed to when he is formally reappointed by President Ciampi.

where's the article that belongs under this title?
This article is really a list of prime ministers of Italy, and I suggest that it be moved to that title. Someone should really write an article about the office of presidente del consiglio, rather than the officeholders. --Trovatore 23:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Went ahead and moved it, and I translated the Italian article on the office, currently at prime minister of Italy. It could use some work; the Italian article was a little sketchier than I might have hoped. --Trovatore 05:45, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Prodi?
Does this article need to be updated to reflect Romano Prodi's resignation, though he will occupy the office in the interim? Nbc7 23:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I would say no. I suppose if you wanted you could put a notation like "(caretaker as of 21 February 2007)" in the box that says "Romano Prodi (second time)".  But in any case please leave the end date blank; once Prodi's successor takes over (even if his successor is Prodi); we'll make the end date the date of accession of the new PM. --Trovatore 00:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Prime ministers with multiple consecutive offices
Hello. The version of this article on the Italian Wikipedia differs from this one regarding prime ministers who have been in office several times consecutively. Here, for instance, Silvio Berlusconi is listed as being in office from 2001-2006, wheras on it.wiki it has a separate entry for his 2nd and 3rd offices (2001-2005 and 2005-2006). Would anyone support changing the page to the way it.wiki has it set out? This was recently brought up on my talk page. --Michael Billington (talk) 01:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I support what you said. This part of en.Wiki is uncorrect. Paolotacchi (talk) 17:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

This is being debated on his page. Wait for consensus there. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean here? There are only two posts. Paolotacchi (talk) 10:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

No, I meant the multiple post discussion you've been having on Berlusconi's page. Therequiembellishere (talk) 22:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Requested move
As the main article Prime Minister of Italy was recently moved from President of the Council of Ministers of Italy, this one should be too. -Rrius (talk) 22:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

And Checco actually moved from that only one and a half days a ago without discussion. Therequiembellishere (talk) 22:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, since there are too many entries in the edit history, we have to go through the process. -Rrius (talk) 22:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not following. Checo moved the page in the last two edits. Just look at the history. Therequiembellishere (talk) 22:19, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Silvio Berlusconi's Cabinet
Sorry but Silvio Berlusconi's Cabinet is still in office to deal ordinary affairs. See official statement of Quirinale: http://www.quirinale.it/elementi/Continua.aspx?tipo=Comunicato&key=12558

Looking at the table, between one cabinet and the following one there is no break

--PaoVac (talk) 18:24, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

timeline
There is any first or second Republic officially — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.19.234.201 (talk) 09:09, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Number
According to you is usefull and correct inserting the "number" of PMs? In my personal view it's not so important as it could be for Head of States, for example Obama is quite famous for being the 44th President, or think at George H. W. Bush, whose biography's title is "41". Nobody know that Mussolini was the 27th PM or Renzi the 56th. What do you think? -- Nick.mon (talk) 13:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Move page
I think that this page should be moved to List of prime ministers of Italy (not capitalized) as a consequence of the similar discussion that can be found in Talk:List of presidents of Austria. The reason is to follow MOS:JOBTITLES, where it is stated that: "Offices, titles, and positions such as president, king, emperor, grand duke, lord mayor, pope, bishop, abbot, chief financial officer, and executive director are common nouns and therefore should be in lower case when used generically", and similarly to List of prime ministers of Elizabeth II or List of chancellors of Germany. --Ritchie92 (talk) 12:49, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Conte I Cabinet
Techincally, the government between M5S and Lega was a simple parliamentary alliance between two different parties (which weren't allied in the elections), like Letta's cabinet with PD and PdL. So why should we use a different color from the one of "mixed coalitions"?. -- Nick.mon (talk) 09:56, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Totally agree with you. Should be grey like other coalition governments. --Ritchie92 (talk) 12:48, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd agree if it wasn't because most coalition governments aren't actually colored grey. Renzi and Gentiloni Cabinets, for example, are colored in PD's red. The Quadripartito and Pentapartito cabinets are also colored in DC's sky blue, as happens with the Organic Centre Left or the Centrism alliances. I understand it for parties that ran in alliance in the elections, but this is not the case for all those examples I mentioned, so what's the criteria for coloring some coalitions and not others? Impru 20  talk 13:45, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * What Impru20 said is correct, but the fact is that even if DC, PLI, PRI, PSDI and PSI run separately, it was sure that they would form a government at the beginning of the new Legislature. It was, de facto, a single bloc of centrist parties, opposed to PCI and MSI. Regarding Renzi and Gentiloni's governments, I should consider them part of the centre-left coalition (even if I agree that it isn't properly correct) because the parties which formed them run together in the 2018 election and in the regional and local elections which occurred from 2014 to 2018. Italian politics is very different from French, Spanish or British ones, almost all the Italian governments, except for few ones, should have a grey background, so to distinguish them we have introduced some shrewdness, like Centrist coalitions in the "First Republic" or Liberal coalitions during the monarchy. -- Nick.mon (talk) 14:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The government's composition kept changing even within a same Legislature, and did so frequently at the time, so I don't think we can say "it was sure they would form a government". Nonetheless, even if we assumed so, the Ciampi Cabinet is also made up of all of the Quadripartito's components, plus a few more parties, yet the government's colour changes from DC's blue to grey. This does not happen to previous changes in government where DC changed allies. On the Renzi and Gentiloni's governments, you are considering the parties part of the centre-left coalition based on an event that took place after the government was formed (and btw, the Letta Cabinet's composition was more of less the same than Renzi's Cabinet from November 2013, yet the whole period is shown in grey, rather than two separated cabinets). Curiously, further changes in composition in only one party motivates a change in the name (and sometimes even the color) of the cabinet—as well as its consideration as a separate cabinet—for the governments in the DC era, but the Letta cabinet is a perfect example on a major cabinet split up not resulting in this. On the contrary, Berlusconi 2001-2006 period shows two Berlusconi cabinets, despite no actual change in the government's party composition or election taking place. I wouldn't say that this is a matter of country-specific politics, but rather that the table is not being consistent with itself. I think that the same set of (objective) criteria should be used for all cases, and it should not be left to particular opinions whether to consider some non-allied parties are allied or not.
 * Note that I'm not saying that most cabinets should use grey, much to the contrary: I think colors are helpful to distinguish different governments. However, grey has been used in some situations where it maybe shouldn't have been used, and the table shows some inconsistencies that should preferably be corrected. Impru 20  talk 14:42, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, Berlusconi 2001-2006 period shows two Berlusconi cabinets, despite no actual change in the government's party composition or election taking place That's because with Berlusconi a new government was formed officially, there was his resignation to the President etc., while with Letta it was just a rimpasto (reshuffle), which is very common in Italy. --Ritchie92 (talk) 14:58, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Ciampi Cabinet included PDS too, it was the first time in which (post-)communists took part in a government after the end of the National Liberation Committee, so I think grey is quite correct in this case. Regarding DC&allies, yes, it wasn't sure that they would form a government and majorities changed very frequently, but they were de facto part of single centrist bloc, dominated by the Christian Democracy, to exclude from power communists and MSI, so, as I said before, we created the so-called Centrist coalition, which, under many forms and names, ruled Italy for almost 50 years, and INMHO using grey for almost all DC-led cabinets is quite misleading. Anyway, the theme you suggested is important, we have to find objective criteria to determine a "coalition's color". -- Nick.mon (talk) 15:03, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * But you would agree with me that this is very subjective. We're attributing colors only based on ad hoc criteria for each government based on personal thoughts (i.e. that because PDS was a (post-)communist party, then it should be gray, but if it was, let's say, PLI, then it should be DC's color). There should be at least some degree of consistency and coherence in the criteria used. Otherwise, what's the argument justifying changing the Conte Cabinet to gray? I could create an ad hoc argument as well arguing that because the Lega was part of the government, it could be the current color in use. Or another criterion specifying that both the Conte I Cabinet and the incoming Conte II Cabinet should be colored yellow because of M5S's presence in it. This should be corrected or else it will only add to the confusion. Impru 20  talk 15:11, 30 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Previous political coalition governement have been colored with the color of the main party. Here it is M5S. I really don't think it's a good idea to have it grey here, as it's what we've been using for caretaker apolitical governements of truly independents ministers.--Aréat (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * For those alliances having a specific color, I'd use a lighter shade of that color. Then, very-large, national unity-like coalitions can be shaded grey as well due to their very heterogeneous composition. For example:

Coalitions:


 * What do you think? Impru 20  talk 15:47, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It could be a good solution. Using different colors for Centrist coalition, Organic Centre-left and Pentapartito is a good idea, also because politics promoted by "Organic centre-left" governments were very different from the ones promoted during the "Years of Centrism". Anyway, INMHI I'd keep grey for the National Liberation Committee, it was the "prototipe" of the mixed coalition. -- Nick.mon (talk) 16:23, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I found a mistake, not made by you, but by someone else. The Centrist coalitions officially ended in 1958, so governments established after this year, composed by DC, PLI, PSDI and PRI, weren't technically part of the Centrist coalition. -- Nick.mon (talk) 16:26, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Look good to me.--Aréat (talk) 10:57, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * But I have a question. If a Conte II Cabinet will be formed, by M5S and PD, which color should we use? In this case, as for the Conte I, I should prefer grey. -- Nick.mon (talk) 17:47, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Refs columns
I think we could remove the reference columns from both tables. There are currently more than 100 different references, all to the same website "storia.camera.it": we can just refer to the website once in the lead section or before the tables, since it contains already all the details of the prime ministers of Italy. Also, see List of chancellors of Germany, a featured list article, which does not have a Refs column in the tables. --Yakme (talk) 08:38, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, maybe the reference columns could be removed, but I'd like to listen to their opinions. I mentioned all those references because during a first candidacy someone said that "the lack of sources was unacceptable for a FL"... anyway I think we could find a solution. Moreover, I've a few doubts even on the "Number" columns. No one knows that Draghi is the 59th PM in the history of Italy. -- Nick.mon (talk) 08:52, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree that the Number column is confusing (also because of the numbers between parentheses) and also in Italy it is not common at all to "number" the PMs or the Presidents (only the legislatures). --Yakme (talk) 09:48, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok, I think we could remove them. I'll do it as soon as possible. -- Nick.mon (talk) 09:58, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Excuse me, if I remove the "number", do I have to move the scope="row" down, in the following row? -- Nick.mon (talk) 10:04, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I just did it myself! --Yakme (talk) 13:08, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Friendlyhistorian! I think we should discuss here. The main reason for the removal is that PMs aren't numbered in Italy; nobody knows that Draghi is the 59th or Berlusconi the 50th. Only legislatures are counted. Moreover, this is not so uncommon, just take a look at List of prime ministers of the United Kingdom. -- Nick.mon (talk) 09:59, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi User talk:Nick.mon! cool name btw. OK listen i get you argument it does make sense but heres my case a lot of stuff are not important theoretically like birth and death date, time in office the legislature next to election , cabinet composition, but adding those makes the article more interesting and many articles doe have so thats my case. Also i think we should change the way the election column looks to more like the belguan prime minister article but with should keep the legislature. Anyway thats my case for the number Column i would like to hear your thoughts (Friendlyhistorian)
 * How are the time in office, birth or death dates, "not important" in a list of people who were prime ministers? Numbering the prime ministers is not a common thing in Italy, and also in many other countries. --Yakme (talk) 15:59, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

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: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:14, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Paolo Gentiloni 2019 Official.jpg

Prodi, Amato and D'Alema
Hi everybody, Do you think we should change the party of Prodi, Amato and D'Alema from 1996 to 2001? We used "The Olive Tree" for years, but maybe "Independent within The Olive Tree" or "Centre-left independents" for Prodi and Amato, and "Democrats of the Left" for D'Alema would be better. Tell me what you think about it. Thank you. -- Nick.mon (talk) 08:04, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The party column refers to the party membership of the PM, so if Prodi and Amato were independents (like Conte) I would leave just "Independent", and a note. The supporting coalition is already written in the coalition column. Yakme (talk) 09:27, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This would be the most "correct" representation, definitely, but I was thinking that maybe a different color to "link" them to centre-left would be better. Prodi was the leader of the coalition and labeling him as simply independent would be misleading. I don't know, it's just my opinion. He wasn't affiliated to any party but he clearly was a member of the centre-left coalition. -- Nick.mon (talk) 15:52, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I would go for the unquestionable fact, that is that Prodi was an independent at that time. Otherwise one could argue that also Conte should show the colors of the yellow-green coalition. Yakme (talk) 06:55, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:54, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Mario Draghi 2022.jpg

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: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:23, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * 8SCALFARO01gr.jpg

Photo
We have a photo which is a portrait of good quality, with the individual looking straight ahead at the camera, face not covered by mic, and recently taken. It's similar to all other photo used for the previous Prime minister in their infobox. Can we please stop replacing it by a photo which doesn't gather all these elements ? Aréat (talk) 22:40, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:08, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Giorgia Meloni Premier (cropped 2).jpg
 * Giorgia Meloni Premier (cropped).jpg

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: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:52, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Giorgia Meloni Official 2022 (cropped).jpg