Talk:Switzerland/Archive 7

magic formula
The magic formula doesn't exist any more. When there were three representators of the Swiss Socialist Pary and only one member of the Swiss People Party, it was called "magic formula". This scheme was broken when Blocher became a member of the council. --217.151.123.141 (talk) 15:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Error in numbers given for population density
Article gives following numbers for population density: 182/km^2 or 100/mi^2. As a square mile is bigger than a square kilometer, something must be wrong.

This is an error, but the markup has a note that says don't change it. I tried to change it and it was reverted. Why is it necessary to have WRONG INFORMATION in this place? And what does WP:MOSNUM have to do with putting incorrect information into an article? This is the Style Sheet. I am confused!! There is nothing wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.142.9.201 (talk) 23:36, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Crime, nationalist
The article explicitly states that crime is due to foreigners. What kind of garbage is this? DON’T try to make a correlation if it’s not there or you don’t understand it. Remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.158.83 (talk) 16:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Mistake for official languages
the article 70 of the constitution is not as reported but like this:"(1) The official languages of the Federation are German, French, and Italian. In communication with persons of Romansh language, the Romansh is also an official language." So there is always a difference between the status of the first three language (German,French,Italian) and the status of Romansch. (Easyboy82)


 * but federal laws and other official acts must not be decreed in this language This is wrong, as there are official acts decreed in Romansh. 195.176.0.55 19:41, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Europe location CHE.png
I am sorry, these location maps are getting a tad ridiculous. A 711k image to show Switzerland's location in Europe? Featuring bathymetry and an inset showing the location of Europe on the world map?? It could also be cropped so that Switzerland shows up as more than a blob in the thumbnail. I also don't suppose that showing the entire Finnmark is in any sense conductive to giving a better impression of the location of Switzerland. dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 15:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Agree, a simple vector graphics map would be better Matteo (talk @) 12:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Nidwalden Revolt & Neutrality
I dont know about this one...maybe it was put there originally by a Nidwalder...anyways...someone removed that sentence...i restored it with the less flavored adjective ("fierce" suppression) from ("brutal" suppression)...and here we see the difficulties of an encylopedia...there are different viewpoints on things, and even simple adjectives can add subtle shifts to how things are perceived...a line can be politically influenced and who is to say what is the "politically correct and neutral version"...its a very tough call...and many degrees possible...do we say "brutal suppression"..do we say "fierce suppression"...do we say "suppression"...or do we remove the line alltogether???...a french editor would likely want that sentence removed...a pro-neutral swiss from the unterwalden might want it to stay, while a more pro EU swiss might want it removed or with less flavor...the canadian from ottawa wants it to go unless it gets a reference...i dont know...it was a couple hundred years ago...yet even still it seems to maintain some controversy.......human politics......and we see that a truly objective neutral point of view or perspective is really impossible to come by...i dont care one way or the other about whether it stays or not...yet in trying to be neutral find its tough to figure out what exactly neutral is...anyways in the swiss library and archives i think it stays...and with the adjective "brutal"...they dont necessarily pull that out tho for the current newspapers and shows...on wikipedia tho?? anyways neutrality is tough to come by...and this was an event 200 years ago in CH...good luck with an encylopedia article on the israeli-palestinian conflict...itll be hundreds or thousands of years before those two sides will agree on an encylopedia article over it...on issues such as these it seems a neutral point of view can only be acquired by reading many articles from all sides of the issue and that is the true and best history and encylopedia format...many stories & versions side by side...Benjiwolf 14:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Odd Sentence
"While the cantons may be smaller than American counties within American states, the Swiss cantons function with more or less the same independence as American states, and sometimes with even more."

What difference does the size of the canton have to do with acting as independent as US states. Switzerland as a whole is close to the size of a US state. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ctitiquer (talk • contribs) 22:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC).
 * I guess the sentence means to suggest that it would be remarkable (in a non-Swiss context) for such a tiny political unit to act independently. But I agree, the sentence probably should be changed or removed. ---Sluzzelin 22:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

well even without noting their small size..the independence of the swiss cantons is highly remarkable...not many countries have allowed such independence from their various compartments...and american states arent as independent as swiss cantons from the federal authorities of their respective lands...an example is: if u want to emmigrate to the US u just need to get past federal authorites and guidelines...in CH you need to get past cantonal authorities & guidelines and they can reject you no matter what the feds say...then u even need to get past the individual compartments in the cantons even...u have three authorities...even the individual town can reject u or a district of the city...local control is very important in switzerland...and as its such a distinctive feature of switzerland that tends to stand out from other countries, such as the frequent broad public referendum votes...it even should remain in the intro...as i looked thru various country intros i felt that some brief basic facts are in order for these types of pages and of course the "standardized boxes at the right"...yet mainly the distinctive features and aspects of the various countries would be nice to have in the intro paragraphs...the fact that a tiny canton of a few square miles/km can have more authority and independence than say an american state dwarfing the entire country of switzerland is highly remarkable...(the cantons maintain their own police forces and the feds dont really get much involved, just in severe cases or organized crime/gangs or severe threat to the entire state types of things yet here even rarely...in the US there are dozens of federal police-like agencies constantly involved in state police matters...(the US is different though)...anyways the canton is its own authority...its mainly only when they want to actually secede from switzerland alltogether that the feds get involved...and they try and work together, the various cantons, and coordinate...yet this is much of a voluntary thing...it wasnt easy to convince the appenzellers to let the women vote...finally they decided to voluntarily allow this long after many other cantons did...in the states if some tiny county in Utah (or even all of Utah) had said "were not allowing the women to vote"...people would be arrested and the military would even come in to force them to accept the broader consensus...in switzerland local differences are more recognized & accepted and the power of diplomatic persuasion is used to try and get a consensus when someone seems too far off from the others...even if it takes years...its a different way...not necessarily always better...so say if in the states if they went more this way: if a state like georgia happened to outlaw abortion...they likely could and the feds would have little authority to stop them...they could only try and talk them out of it or use financial incentive etc. etc...)...Benjiwolf 17:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

How many Matterhorn pictures
Just a quick question: "How many pictures of the Matterhorn should there be?". Currently there are two (Image:Matterhorn Riffelsee 2005-06-11.jpg and Image:Zermatt and Matterhorn.jpg). Despite its beauty, I think we could do without any (other images of Swiss Alps being used). -- User:Docu
 * At first glance, maybe the second Matterhorn needs to go (Is Zermatt really a "typical small Swiss ski town", as worded in the caption?) Yes, lots of Alps, but I don't think the selection is bad either, and it's more evenly balanced than the postcard welcome at Portal:Switzerland. More pictures from the Romandie and perhaps a train might make for nice additions too. ---Sluzzelin 10:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC).
 * ..I'm not sure both should go though. Yes, it's a cliché, but not only is the Matterhorn characteristically beautiful, wont many readers expect to find it here? They might not know its name and be disappointed if it gets left out. I guess I'm saying a picture of the Matterhorn should be included in this article because it's a cliché. ---Sluzzelin 10:57, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

yes i had thought that when putting in the pictures of the matterhorn twice...i didnt at that time have another good ski town picture...i think i will replace with a nice pic of the simmental i found perhaps... from a lift yet in summertime...anyways the matterhorn i think should stay higher up in the article...it is what most people think of when considering switzerland anyways...its highly symbolic of switzerland...as to many mountain pics...well switzerland is pretty much tons of mountains...and the entire southern half is mainly & exclusively very high mountains...yet there are some places where you cant see any mountains in any directions...though mainly on cloudy and hazy days...or from inside ur house...Benjiwolf 16:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

The photos play like a tourist advert or foldout. There is much more to the Swiss Confederation than the beauty spots. It needs more variety so I will probably be adding/changing the pictures. -  maxrspct  ping me  03:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I have to say that even tho I am happy to see such a fine page about my country, the pictures, although representing the biggest part of the landscape, are not the ones where the population is more dense. People might think we live in mountains with no electricity. There are no picture of a city, or a nice shiny take of a city with a fab boardwalk near the lake, of which there are several. And since tourism is a big part of the country, let me tell you that people do not come here for hikes (some do), but they mostly go to the sunny southern region where the landscape is more flat, and different than what I see here. The selection of pictures as seen on this page, is misleading if you ask me. Dollvalley 23:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)


 * C'mon I live in Zurich. I can see the mountains from there, even on a not so clear day... Most of our country is mountainous... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tprosser (talk • contribs) 17:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

1890 Valais "painting"
Is that really a painting? It looks like one of those old monochrome photos that they colored in. That was common back then. Bababoef 11:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

things missing
guys... we need at least a mention of William Tell. a painting or a picture of that Altdorf statue? also at least some mention or a picture of military duty. fondue, chocolate, tunnels (Loetchberg?) also something unique to Switzerland would be one of those signs outside small towns that give the worship hours for each religion in the town church. can anyone get a photo of one of those?

Bababoef 11:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

the fondue is nice yet we already have a cheese pic...these are all photos of traditional culture and none of modern day ski town culture etc...and there is after all a culture specific page too you know...Benjiwolf 19:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Sali. ah ok. we should put more pictures on that page too then. i didn't know about it. i'll put the schwingen one there. as for contemporary culture, maybe a picture of those colorful painted life-sized cows that were all over the place? in new york city, too i think. as for a ski culture picture, shouldn't there be actual snow in the picture? maybe even a skiier? otherwise it's just another landscape, really. the Bern pic is nice but if it's meant to say something about architecture, wouldn't it be better to put some photos from the Swiss expo? i have some. that's also modern, so we could kill 2 birds with 1 stone. There's also a blank spot near the top which could fit a pic or two if I could only figure out how...

Bababoef 05:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

ja...i felt the schwingen pic a little too much and little more obscure traditional culture, yet maybe nice for the culture page as would a cow fight from the valais under traditional culture...the bern pic maybe should be moved somewhere else i agree with that..yet as its the capital of switzerland i think it should stay somewhere...in terms of the modern culture and city culture i think actually a pic of the inside of a swiss dance party is most accurate...and after all i just read 73% in switzerland now live in cities and urban areas...the traditional culture is nice to have some pics of...yet it is a little misleading if someone just sees these pics of swiss in costume...its rare i see a swiss in costume...just during the cow drives and on some festival occasions...the pic i restored was of quiet summer in the alps...yet i agree a pic of skiing might be nice with some snow for a winter representation...as to a pic of painted cows???...i dont know about that and it doesnt seem to me to fit in a swiss culture discussion and is some recent advertising campaign type thing i suppose???...ive actually never even seen what ur talking about and ive been to hundreds of places in switzerland...Benjiwolf 19:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

the cow thing was kind of a guerilla art thing. in Züri i think? they gave real artists each a life-sized plastic cow to paint and then put them all over the city in random places. some of them were really funny. it was so popular that the project was repeated in NYCity. as for other modern stuff, there's the possibility of a pic of the swiss world cup fussball team. there are 2 other bern pics on the page. but no genève (maybe UN headquarters?) or basel pics. aren't there too many landscapes? especially all those paintings. the dance club thing isn't really uniquely swiss, is it? would you put it on the USA page? more ideas: picture of a swatch? swiss olympic bobled team? Bababoef 05:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

well it seems to me that a thing doesnt have to be "uniquely" swiss to be on the swiss page in general...if dancing and going to music clubs is one of the main cultural activities of the swiss year after year then thats swiss culture...other people make cheese too besides the swiss...that doesnt mean we shouldnt have a cheese pic if its a big thing in CH...i think i mentioned in the text that swiss culture these days has a lot in common with other cultures...and is somewhat cosmopolitan...the traditional culture is there yes...there is a big yodelling fest this year in st moritz area...yet even these yodelers or swingen wrestlers arnt going around in traditional costume much...and they go to dance clubs & ski probably more than they wrestle...we should definately mention the traditional cultures specific to CH, and include some pics, yet we need to convey an accurate image of the culture these days too, so modern culture also has its place if its very typical culture year after year...and by modern culture i mean the last 50 years...what is the typical modern swiss culture this last 50 years???...it is a mix of the traditional culture and modern types that have phased in, such as modern dance clubs...a dance club and a pic of a swiss restaurant/pub i would think are two very good examples of where you see many swiss in their leisure time...a pic of sledding or skiing is also good...sure the swiss do all sorts of stuff, go to art galleries, go to the theater, etc. yet we cant fit in all those pics...put them in a gallery at the bottom tho if you wish...know how to do that???...the main page i feel should be many pics of what switzerland looks like...the countryside...the buildings...and some pics of some swiss people...in traditional costume sure a few...yet mostly what the swiss usually look like...then u have the galleries at the bottom to put in all sorts of other pics or the specific article dealing with that topic...all the old paintings and photos are by history section...Benjiwolf 15:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

If you don't talk about Swiss banking and banking accounts than your really missing where a lot of the income is coming from. Swiss bank accounts are untouchable by anyone except the person who made the account. It is also rumored that Saddam Hussein had over 300 million dollars in there of Iraqi peoples' money that the law people couldn't take and it was just handed down to the family. 21 March, 2007
 * Only private, numbered Swiss bank accounts are untouchable to anyone but the person who made the account. There is obviously confusion in that there are also regular Swiss bank accounts, just like many if not most people in Switzerland have with their local bank (which are not just numbered, and also have a name associated with them). I am currently unsure of the proper term for the Swiss numbered bank account. Lostvalley 03:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Under current legislation, not even numbered accounts are untoucheable by law. As soon as you are not Swiss, at least the information that you happen to have an account in Switzerland is going to your authorities. This is why numbered accounts are no longer interesting to foreigners... Plus, if you are no High Net Worth Individual, you cannot even open one. Only in the Private Banking sector... And even there it costs waaaay too much!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tprosser (talk • contribs) 17:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

the swiss "interned" 300,000 people???
do you mean they imprisoned 300,000 people?...do you mean they did like america and somehow had camps people couldnt leave till the war was over like in america with the japanese???...do you mean they took in 300,000 people...just what do you mean??..Benjiwolf 15:39, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

By the laws of neutrality, i believe set from the Congress of Vienna in 1815, neutral countries are required to intern any people from either side that cross their borders. A lot of french and polish soldiers, and american airmen were interned. planes were confiscated. I do not know if any nazi soldiers were interned. They were given food shelter and visits from the ICRC until the war ended, but could not freely wander about Switzerland. I think the officers and enlisted were held at different locations. The officers were kept in a resort town (Arosa? i forget). This had no fences or anything, but was remote enough that escape was difficult (there was a breakout attempt). The enlisted men were held in camps. Civilian refugees have a slightly different status under international law, but were not allowed to take part in the Swiss economy i think. I think some were in prisons? but some lived in communities under supervision. I'm not sure, it may have been up to the individual cantons. Research on the civilian part is needed, you are right. This is all a matter of international law, which Switzerland took quite seriously, as armed neutrality was it's only survival strategy. They imprisoned a St. Gallen policeman who smuggled Jews across the border and did not pardon him until the 1990s after he died. Pardoning him was pretty controversial. There was also a controversial incident just before the war where a Swiss official supposedly cooperated with German officials in arranging for Jewish Germans emigrating to Switzerland to have a "J" stamped in their passports. The policy was quickly reversed by higher-ups in the Swiss Goverment. The Swiss involvement in this incident is rather murky and still being investigated by historians today. Impartiality or at least following the rules of neutrality is all part of being a neutral country during war. The word "interned" is also used in the Bergier Commission report, which is why I used it here. See the exact reference (with page number) that i included. The economic cost of supporting 300,000 people who do not participate in the economy was large for a country of 4 million, and was one of the reasons used to argue that not all refugees could be taken. Note that proportional to overall population, Switzerland took in more civilian refugees and Jews than the U.S. during WW2.

Bababoef 19:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, so i think we need to mention a couple of the things you just said to clarify what went on, just saying they "interned 300,000 people" without mentioning the congress of viena laws and neutrality policy is somewhat misleading and is too vague by itself, i think we need to state clearly that they were even required by international law to intern soldiers and citizens from the various parties in the conflict...and on the side (actually in my opinion the entire country could be considered a resort town, and id be quite happy to be interned in Saas Fee or anywhere in the Wallis/Valais actually, you woulndt see me trying to escape)...yet anyways i do think we need to mention the congress of viena laws...Benjiwolf 22:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I did some more reading, and according to the Bergier Commission report it looks like the only relevant international law was the Hague Conventions, specifically the 1907 one. This regards internment of combatants only. The Congress of Vienna just made Swiss neutrality permanent, and says nothing about refugees. The treatment of civilian refugees was a matter of Swiss law and policy only. Not international law, really. Reading the report, it seems that some civilians were interned as well. This was because almost all of them were in the country illegally. It was up to the cantonal police to decide what to do with them. Some cantons were more lenient than others and issued "tolerance permits". At the peak there were 115,000 refugees in the country. Text has been changed accordingly Bababoef 06:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Location maps available for infoboxes of European countries
On the WikiProject Countries talk page, the section Location Maps for European countries had shown new maps created by David Liuzzo, that are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps. As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed soon at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish two things: Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the '''presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited''' to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option. There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 19 Feb2007 00:47 (UTC)
 * whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions),
 * which new version (with of without indicating the entire European Union by a separate shade) should be applied for which countries.

Swiss Parliament not a legislature?
Under the heading, "Politics", we find (as of 27 Feb. 2007) the following puzzling statements: "The...parliament,...has administrative and judicial, but not legislative powers. The power to legislate is delegated to the two Chambers of Parliament..." Are there any experts available to clarify this? Thank you.Writtenright 22:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Writtenright

I find that weird, too. Dunno who wrote it, but I modified that section so it makes more sense. I included a reference to the website of the Swiss Federal Dept of Foreign Affairs where things are explained. Bababoef 08:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Neutral?
Should we tag the neutrality of this article (Switzerland) as not disputed? Hehehe, sorry. I made a joke :/. GofG undefinedundefinedundefined Talk 17:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

All joking aside, this article is not as neutral as its subject matter: "The Swiss are a diplomatic, moderately conservative (by European standards) and very industrious people". What kind of article states such national stereotypes as if they were facts? The whole sectionn on "the Swiss" needs to be removed. LeighvsOptimvsMaximvs (talk) 10:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Agree Matteo 10:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

i kind of agree, but about 60% of that section is factual, and could be kept somewhere. Bababoef 17:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

My comment on Swiss neutrality was reverted supposedly because the source I cited did not question Swiss neutrality during WW2. In fact the source, the ICE or Bergier commission, says precisely that Swiss participation in arms supplying "contravened the law of neutrality." I don't want to start a revert war but I'm interested as to why the conclusion of an independent commission cannot stand beside the claim that "Switzerland has a long history of neutrality." It seems a reasonable addition.Littrans 02:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I probably should have brought this up for discussion first rather than just removing it. I meant the web page cited does not mention the word neutrality anywhere on it. It's mentioned in various reports, but not on the cited page and also does not seem to be one of their main conclusions. My larger concern however was whether this belongs in the lead. Neutrality is rather widely established and defining characteristic of the country, but are some incidents of state involvement in arms sales important enough to warrant mention in a concise overview of the country as a whole? It seems to be clearly important for the article in general, as well as Switzerland during the World Wars, but does not seem to befit the lead. Perhaps this could be moved to the modern history section? --skew-t (talk) 03:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree with you. While the WW2 controversy is important, there are plenty of more important history topics and they cannot be all mentioned in the lead. mge o  talk 12:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Chancellor
Are they eaual to the Council? If so, should they be mentioned in the infobox? Therequiembellishere 04:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

wha? Are who equal to the Council? Bababoef 17:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The Federal Chancellor (currently Annemarie Huber-Hotz). On the infobox, they re listed directly under the Federal Councilors.

Therequiembellishere 21:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Are the police going to come?
I put my garbage in regular bags bought in France. I don't know if I'm breaking the law or not, but I haven't seen any police with my receipts, yet. So if that is right then can someone explain why Switzerland's size has anything to do with its recycling programs? And isn't anti-littering bans, pro-littering? 158.232.77.100 15:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Switzerland due to its size is heavily active in recycling and anti-littering bans, all garbage (except dangerous items, batteries etc.) in Switzerland must be disposed of in government approved bags which can only be bought from local shops and grocery stores. These special bags include a pollution tax thereby urging people to use less. Swiss health officials and police often open up garbage which has been deposited in the wrong bags. They search for evidence such as old bills which connect the bag to the household/person they originated from.


 * It has to be noted that the pollution tax is not applied everywhere in Switzerland; it basically depends on your canton and municipality. In some places that have not yet gone insane, the police has more important things to do than opening people's garbage (yes, this sentence is slightly POV :-). I'll correct the article accordingly. I'll also remove the "due to its size", which does not strike me as being justified. Schutz 21:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Depending where you live, you either have to buy an official bag which includes the disposal charge from the Gemeinde, or buy a pre-paid sticker which you can attach any bag. This is not a federal government thing, it is a disposal charge levied by the Gemeinde (=borough/city/parish), and varies depending on the size of the bag. I have edited the section. Where I live, if you put out rubbish in a non pre-paid bag, they just leave it where it is and put a red sticker on it explaining the rules. Only if a rubbish is left out repeatedly in non-pre-paid bags do they investigate. TiffaF 06:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, this is not correct. Actually while in most of the german speaking switzerland this applies, there are still many regions (in particular in the french-speaking part) where the waste is included in the normal taxes. Both in the cantons of Vaud and Valais I have never seen stickers or special bags, but I used them in Zurich, Basel and Aargau. There IS however a federal directive that mention the principle of "polluter - payer" but the interpretation is broad and there is anyway no federal police to punish cantons that intepret is "differently" :-). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.246.31.6 (talk) 10:35, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Additional Info: It should be noted that the fine is now CHF 2'000.-- for both dumping refuse and household waste/recyclables in the wrong places as well as for the non-use of official refuse sacks (where applicable).

Where I live they collect the rubbish that is put out in non-official sacks, the have to, otherwise Switzerland would end up like Naples/Napoli and there would be a hygiene problem.

The fine may seem high, but nowadays in CH fines are notoriusly high. For example watching TV without a licence now incurs a CHF 5'000.-- fine (plus the cost of the licence), and I personally know someone who was find this amount.

In any case I have amended the article and updated both the CHF fine amount as well as the US$ amount according to latest exchange rate.

Non-NPOV language in Geography
"Switzerland's natural beauty is breathtaking ... it is without question one of the world's prettiest. The quite remarkable thing about the scenic nature of Switzerland is that it is near-ubiquitous: almost every place in Switzerland possesses this picture-postcard landscape."

This sort of language doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. I flagged the Geography section as a POV violation. I don't know enough about Switzerland to modify, but hopefully someone who does can. Ncdoyle 02:15, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Ncdoyle. I removed that paragraph and the tag. Perhaps I shouldn't have removed the tag though - the article still mentions "beautiful scenery" twice, and needs to be sobered up considerably. ---Sluzzelin talk  03:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

More information on gun control
Since it's a current event, it would be good to have a section on gun control. I'm hesitating since it would be severly edited and dismantled by the Digg masses. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fontenot 1031 (talk • contribs) 20:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC).
 * see Gun politics in Switzerland, which is duly categorized in Category:Politics of Switzerland, interested users can find it in ten seconds using the search function or by browsing. How is this a current event? dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 12:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Romand?
The intro paragraph says: "four official languages : Swiss German (die Schweiz), Romand (la Suisse), Italian (Svizzera) et Romansh (Svizra)." I believe "Romand" should just be changed to "French"--the link just leads to "French language" anyway. Is there any reason to keep it as is? Even if the Swiss refer to their French dialect as "Romand," it is completely unclear to the casual, English-language reader. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.73.62.174 (talk) 02:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC).

As I know, "Romand" refers not to the French dialect, it refers to the swiss people who speaks french. --84.75.251.1 01:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

"Romand" refers to those people as well as to their language. There is a difference between French and Romand in both meanings - at least if you ask the Romand. They consider it as a huge insult if you say they talk or were French. It's not an official thing but i still think it's sort of important as it's a part of their mentality. The real difference between the languages French and Romand is small, you may compare it with the difference between British and American English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.79.132.149 (talk) 17:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

83.228.184.135 (talk) 13:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC) JnB I am actually a Swiss Romand. Romand is not a dialect. You are right that we don't like to be considered as French but we considere ouself speakink french. Our french is slightly different (really just few words) as the one spoken in other countries but we take it as genuine as any other. Romandie is the area in Switzerland where people speak french. Romand is somebody coming from this area. We have several dialects not related to french but we are losing them because less people speak them.

Huber-Hotz
The inclusion of Chancellor in the infobox is likely to confuse the role with that of Chancellor or Chancellor. Thus I'm not sure if it's helpful to include her (him), it may be preferable to remove "leader_title2" and "leader_name2" from the infobox. -- User:Docu

Irony
I see the reasoning and all... i just think it's ironic that the article about Switzerland would be having neutrality disputes. SpookyPig 16:42, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, agreed...I just clicked on the link to this article (looking for some pics) and I literally burst out laughing when I saw that Switzerland's neutrality was disputed. ;-) Maybe since they accidentally invaded Liechtenstein? Anyway, I'm sure there are some legitimate reasons for putting the tag there, but thanks for the laugh anyway. K. Lásztocska 17:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh, me too! Still, is there a reason for the tag? I understand that the original concern (with the geography section) was resolved... ---Illythr 20:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Swiss German the official language???
Since when is Swiss German one of the fourth official languages???? Mostly they might speak Swiss German but the official language is German, just like you can read it on newspapers and on tv. 62.2.236.130 13:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Failed GA nomination
I've speedy failed the GA nomination for this article due to inadequate referencing and the presence of the Neutrality tag. (Caniago 16:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC))


 * err.. perhaps a little too speedy? the neutrality concerns seem to be addressed (avoiding the obvious joke regarding the 'neutrality' of this article..), and it doesn't look inadequately referenced to me; i think somebody should renominate this article for good article status so that it can have a real review. 131.111.24.187 17:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest submitting it for peer review instead - the article is a long way from being ready for GA status. The article will never pass while so many paragraphs remain uncited. Take a look at GA standard country articles like United States or Indonesia and compare the citations. However before submitting it for peer review again, please make sure the concerns raised in the previous two peer reviews (Peer review/Switzerland/archive2, Peer review/Switzerland/archive1) have been addressed. (Caniago 05:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC))

Extremism, anti-Semitism etc.
There is an "extremism" subsection in Politics of Switzerland. If we're going to discuss rightwing extremism here in the main article, it would seem more sensible to use the solid figures given there than citing some random study "Anti-Jewish and Anti-Israel Attitudes in Switzerland" based on a dataset of 1,030. There is, in fact, a small Neo-Nazi scene in Switzerland, estimated at some 1,200 heads or 0.016%, there is no need to hush this up. This sort of study, otoh, is perfectly worthless, because they always manage to find what they are looking for. I put it to you that World Values Survey in 2005 found that 76.4% of the Swiss believe in God, while Eurobarometer in the same year came up with the figure of 48%. Talk about margin of error... dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 18:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello Dab,


 * I just saw your comments. Anti-semitism and rightwing extremism are correlated but I think it is safe to say that anti-Semitism is not confined to rightwing extremism alone. Since you discussed numbers, please note the second report conducted on the same subject by the University of Geneva mentions 23% (not 10% as originally reported on the main page).
 * Regards,


 * 128.241.41.161 08:10, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality as of 1815?
I believe that there is an error in this article in relation to Swiss neutrality. Switzerland, if I am not mistaken, has officially observed a policy of neutrality for hundreds of years. To be exact, this has been official Swiss policy since their defeat at the hands of the French in 1515 at Marignano in Northern Italy. Up to this point the Swiss had been an expansionary confederation, annexing what they could. They did not annex any additional territory through the use of force after their defeat in 1515; instead, they turned inwards.

There is actually a rather striking inconsistency within the article itself. The introduction makes it sound as if neutrality was officially recognized in 1815, but a little further down the page under the heading "Old Swiss Confederacy" it is stated that neutrality was legally confirmed by the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. The Swiss, it should be pointed out, did not choose to enter the Napoleonic wars, but were invaded by French forces. The capital was moved to Aarau and the cantonal structure was altered. These changes only lasted a few years before governmental structures resembling the previous ones were reintroduced. In my opinion, after taking all of this into consideration, the sentence "Switzerland has had a long history of being neutral (it has not been in a foreign war since 1815)" does not work. At the very least the parentheses should be removed. I also believe that 1515 should be mentioned as a "marker" in terms of neutrality, and that the involuntary nature of Swiss participation in Napoleonic Europe should be emphasized (i.e. they were not the aggressor and did nothing to bring on the French invasion). Ami in der Schweiz 18:27, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * the independence of the Confederacy was recognized in 1648. Independence is not the same as neutrality. Neutrality is not "recognized", it is declared. To the best of my knowledge, this happened in 1815, but if you have a source claiming that the Swiss declared their neutrality back in 1648, do cite it. In 1515 the Swiss lost a battle, that's nothing to do with either independence or neutrality. dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 10:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

oh, it does, if you distinguish between factual neutrality and declared neutrality. greetz --84.73.71.246 (talk) 18:24, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Sports
The sports section is a mixed bunch: Soccer as a popular spectators' sport, a couple of original Swiss games bordering on folklore, the fact that motorsports were banned for half a century (which just changed, as far as I know), floorball as a new popular sport, and the mentioning of two top-athletes in high-level tennis who happen to be Swiss. No reference to cycling and wintersports. Any thoughts on how to structure this? I checked some other countries' articles, but wasn't that impressed so far. ---Sluzzelin talk  15:56, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Motto
I am Swiss but I never heard anything about a national motto "Unus pro omnibus, omnes pro uno" - that's not all "traditional". 83.76.205.58 07:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Live and learn! See Unus pro omnibus, omnes pro uno, and also /Archive_4 and the two following sections. Lupo 08:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Anti-Swiss Bigotry
The paragraph under 'Politics' accusing the Swiss people of being "xenophobic" and "anti-Semitic" is itself nothing more than leftist bigotry against conservative-leaning Swiss. Not only does the paragraph have nothing to do with detailing how the Swiss state works (the other paragraphs do that just fine,) it doesn't belong in the article because slandering half the country of Switzerland for being "xenophobic" for wanting to keep Switzerland Swiss is absurd (you might as well have accused the Swiss of being excessively patriotic.) Likewise, the "anti-Semite" smear for opposing Israel's overreaching influence in international affairs is unnecessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.44.118 (talk • contribs)
 * There's a source, take it up with the people who published the survey. Corvus cornix 05:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * it's a question of WP:UNDUE. this would be more at home at politics of Switzerland. See also Main article fixation. dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 14:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Dale-swiss
Please stop adding the same stuff to this article again and again. There is a reason why it keeps getting removed. --Kabelleger 13:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's good to have this section now. It was hard to figure out what to make of his edits... it looked like good faith, but it removed refs and added a bunch of unreferenced cra stuff. Now that this is here, people will have an angle on his edits. By the way, Dale-Swiss, feel free to explain your actions to the wanting public.  •  Maurog   •  13:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

it would appear that Dale-Swiss is in violation of the WP:3RR at this point. dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 14:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * --warned user, further reverts should result in blocks. also note I've moved his unwikified piece on recycling to waste management in Switzerland. dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 14:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Dale-swiss just did another revert which I just undid. Lostvalley 14:56, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

No. There was no revert. It was total undoing of sheer vandalism and obscuring of data. Why would anyone want to waste their time continually posting old data?!?!?! The fines are not in the few hundreds of francs but 2'000.-- re the refuse biznez. Meanwhile it's quite interesting to see that Jehovah's Witnesses operate in no less than 11 languages in CH and have even publications in Romansch etc. (I am not a Witness)!!) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dale-swiss (talk • contribs).
 * To Dale-swiss above, please sign your posts using ~ Lostvalley 15:05, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * There are things that are simply not relevant in a general Switzerland article, like the numerous different spellings and variants of Romansch, details about some religious group and the like. If that level of detail would be added to the entire article, it would be huge, unreadable and totally useless. There are further articles linked from this one to cover the various topics, e.g. Romansh, where in-depth discussion may (and should!) take place. --Kabelleger 16:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Point taken re the Romansch spelling variants - I have removed two. Also found the source for the refuse fines.

There was no real reason for the block though. All edits and additional info has been put up in good faith and all figures are true and up to date (unlike many other reverts, undoes and posts). Also 3 identical reverts were not made, not that it now matters. Dale-swiss 17:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * well, you're using the talkpage now, aren't you, so the block seems to have served its purpose. Try to work towards WP:CONSENSUS, don't try to work against other people, try to understand what they're telling you. dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 21:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

No not at all Only using the talk page as someone pointed out that it existed!!! If someone is not online then a block serves no purpose whatsoever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.76.135.55 (talk) 17:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Dale-Swiss, referenced old data will always have priority over unreferenced new data. If you want to add new figures, please find a reliable source. And please please please don't do that huge reverting again, which undoes some constructive edits and messes up the refs. Try to make smaller edits, one section at a time, and keep them sourced. Thank you.  •  Maurog   •  07:14, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

We’re apparently not getting the message across (compare his last edit with previous) --Van helsing 10:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And again, not going to revert that one, isn’t going to accomplish much. --Van helsing 10:28, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * well playing revert wars against a concensus will result in a block...CyrilleDunant 11:05, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You bet it will. Third iteration, so 2² days of tranquility (I count from zero). Rama 15:04, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about you, but this is the first time I have been reverted with an edit summary "No. No revert!" :o/ dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 10:19, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Xenophobic?
I deleted the second part of this sentence: "A recent study found one in ten Swiss held anti-Semitic views and fifty percent of the Swiss population are xenophobic." The cited article is about anti-semitism. Xenophobia is not mentioned once! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.240.229.65 (talk • contribs)

Naming convention
Is there any basis for the odd convention of referring to cantons as "Canton (blank)" (e.g.: Canton Jura) instead of "the canton of (blank)" or just "(blank) canton"?
 * I think it is because of common usage, and probably there are some historical causes (i.e. if the name was previously used for the region or if the canton of X is named because of an existing "X" ). Cate |Talk 09:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Languages map image
This image has been incorrectly sized/placed (when viewed in Firefox, at least). Could this be resized so the entire image can be viewed, and placed under a separate languages section? Katstevens 16:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

OK this image has now been fixed. Thanks! --Katstevens 16:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I was just wondering if there has been some reason or previously reached consensus as to the languages map appearing twice in this article. (It appears in the Cantons section and the Demographics section). It is important to show these distinctions, but does the same map need to be shown twice in the same article? Ixnayonthetimmay 04:02, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Switzerland has no capital
Switzerland has (de jure) no capital. Bern is only the federal city ("Bundesstadt"). You can read more about that on the german wikipedia: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.75.251.1 (talk • contribs)


 * I agree that this is a matter of some debate but having read the link in de.wikipedia, and then the source given at the bottom of that page, I have to say it leaves the matter very unclear. However I would point out that by following the Swiss governments own link to ch.ch I have found a "Facts and figures" page which in it's French, German and English versions say that Berne is "Switzerland’s capital city and the seat of the government". Green Giant 21:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Switzerland and Europe section
you should call it "Switzerland and EU" which is different. secondly, not only SVP opposes membership at EU, also parts of CVP, FDP and the whole SD is opposed. --Philtime 21:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

SVP campaign
I've removed a large paragraph from the "Modern history" section about the SVP campaign in the current elections. It was rather biased (starting with "In a disturbing turn of events..."), and somehow linked the campaign to the murder of Ylenia, which smells of original research. The campaign maybe deserves mention, but a single phrase would do here (in the section "Politics", not "Modern history"!), and it would need to be unbiased. A more detailed and carefully written coverage of that campaign, the responses it drew within Switzerland and its reception in other countries might perhaps be appropriate for Politics of Switzerland. Lupo 17:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Concur. I meant to revert this as well, but apparently got the wrong revision. Sandstein 21:08, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Politics section
This needs a serious rewrite. First, what are all the references? Banks, Tremblay, Turner & Barry are not listed anywhere as far as I can see. Second, it's badly structured. The main things should be mentioned first (bicameral parliament, federal council). The paragraph about the role of the president is completely unclear; it'd be sufficient to state that one of the seven councillors is elected as president, but that this position is more a representative one (maybe use the expression primus inter pares) and "elections" are actually a rotation (and vice-president of one year is president next year). The more theoretical and comparative considerations from Turner & Barry could be dropped without loss of clarity.

The section should also cover the separation of powers (that's the place to mention the federal court), and the federative structure that leaves many decisions at the cantonal level. Briefly discuss the "Konkordanz".

The section should also very briefly cover the political landscape. Mention the four big parties, plus the Greens. FDP dominant in 19th century, SP surge in the early 20th century, (mention first SP federal councillor with year; put into perspective by brief reference to the rise of social-democrat parties in other European countries); SVP on the rise since the 1980s; CVP; Greens a minority party not represented in the federal council but at around 8-10% an established political factor. Mention that far-right (SD) and far-left (PdA/POP) parties are fringe parties.

Eliminate this ridiculous "xenophobia" thing. There's a later mention of this xenophobia thing in the "demographics" section, which is more about languages than anything else. Maybe a new (sub-)section on the social structure would be in order, that could touch upon several noteworthy aspects: income distribution, rural/urban, ethnic background (including a mention of "saisonniers"?), resident foreigners, refugees. But still in summary style.

Instead of a section "CH and the EU", there should be a section on "International relations". Some mention should be made that even before becoming a UN member, Switzerland already participated in several UN organisations (UNESCO, WHO, ...).

Lupo 10:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Sippenhaft
Why exactly was that removed, its factual and referenced, indeed certain factions in Switzerland (the largest most popular party in fact) are trying to introduce the practice of Sippenhaft into law, its completely true BrigadierGeneralBaptisms 08:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Because it is not in place, because de SVP always tends to suggest things like that, and because those things almost systematically fail when finally put through a referendum. This is in fact not relevant or interesting in terms of "History". CyrilleDunant 09:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * because, first of all "trying to introduce" is not of sufficient relevance. Many people are "trying" to implement their ways. As long as official Switzerland doesn't follow suit, this is just a pending popular initiative like any other. The "black sheep" thing is notable to the Swiss federal election, 2007 article, but to treat trivia of the latest elections on the article on the country would be blatant Recentism. If you are interested in right-wing populism, edit right-wing populism or Swiss People's Party. If you are interested in Ausländerkriminalität, edit Ausländerkriminalität. --dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 09:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[[Image:Wähleranteil.png|thumb|350px|National elections, popular vote, 1919-2003. I can make out three periods:
 * 1. interwar, the "classical" situation of the bourgeois FDP+CVP holding >50%, with farmers' and workers' interests represented by about 15% and 25%, respectively.
 * 2. WWII and postwar: a weaker SVP and stronger Social Democrats, with a communist fringe during the Cold War, and with the LdU introducing a "centrist" platform
 * 3. 1980s to present: decline of the classical "center", but huddling of the former leaders FDP+CVP as the new center, with polarisation of nationalist fringe party-lets on one hand and the rise of the Green Party on the other. Since the 1990s absorption of the radical right into the SVP.

Discuss Swiss politics in these larger terms, not by hysterical notes on latest news. ]] we can briefly refer to the transition in Swiss politics over the 1990s and 2000s from a stable consensual government to hysterical right-wing populism and the resulting polarisation. But, can we do this detachedly, with a view to developments over decades, not months, please? Introduce a stable discussion at Swiss politics first, and then we can briefly summarize that in the pertinent section of this article. --dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 10:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the very nice graph, it is very interesting, it looks like the most stable party has been the social democrats, squeezed down only during the 80s really, with peaks just post world war 2, and if u count the greens as mainly a branch of them and offshoot, then another peak for them just recently as well...with the current counter-peak by the SVP, then indeed one could say that politics has become more polarized in switzerland these days, the left has grown to the highest levels ever, and the SVP has shifted more right (i think the call for Sippenhaft and those sheep posters clearly shows this) and has also grown this "full right" nationalist faction to the highest levels ever BrigadierGeneralBaptisms 19:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

As to writing on the auslanderkriminalitat or the swiss peoples party pages???...well what english speaking person do u know thats ever gonna read those topics??? they are just going to read the main swiss page is all!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrigadierGeneralBaptisms (talk • contribs) 19:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Such people should then refrain from writing on things about which they obviously have no ideas. The recent "nazism craze" in the foreign press is about as exact and correct as were claim that the USA were turning into a theocracy because the President was a born-again christian. Rama 05:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The graph is indeed a very nice thing to have, but it's very hard to read for colour-blinds. Any chance someone could put arrows from the labels to the relevant parts of the graphs ? Rama 05:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * well, indeed, plus the "Sippenhaft" moniker is polemical in itself. Nobody is in fact clamouring for "Sippenhaft". Understand that Sippenhaft means that your relatives are punishable if you commit a crime. Nobody is calling for such a thing. The legal punishment for, say, a burglary, is a prison sentence. Only the actual burglar will ever receive a prison sentence, even under the most radical proposals of the SVP. The revoking of the residence permit is not legally a punishment, because there is no fundamental right to a residence permit. A residence permit can be discontinued for any number of reasons, including, in this proposals, for parents whose underage children have been convicted of serious crimes. It is hardly new that the legal guardian of a minor can to a certain extent be held responsible for the actions of his ward. The SVP initiative is a rather radical tightening of residency laws, but to compare it to "Sippenhaft" is pure propaganda (or should I say, counter-propaganda). --dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 07:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Propaganda, populism and sensationalism on the part of the newspapers, and a great deal of misunderstanding of Swiss politics. I am under the impression that people outside Switzerland see the radicalisation and popularity of the SVP like a crack in a wall, which puts the "wall of democracy" at risk collapsing.
 * In Switzerland, extremism is kept at bay is not so much because it hits a hard wall (like maybe France's Gayssot laws) than because it is forced to swim in a pool full of shortcrust pastry: since not only the legislative but also the executive branch is kept representative of the political spectrum, even the most popular movement has to share power with rivals or opponents. Since decision are taken by consensus, extreme positions tend to be minimised.
 * Decisions by the government are subject to referendum, so even if an extreme decision was taken by the federal council, it could be vetoed by the people.
 * On the reverse, the people can request a referendum to take place on any issue; if found valid, the government has ten years to organise the referendum. If one scared people into requesting a Sippenhaft law, the government would simply organise the referendum a few years away after things have settled down.
 * Switzerland is by nature a stable, centrist country. These references to nazism are funny but when stated seriously, they are nothing but uneducated, sensationalist wolf-crying. Rama 08:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I concur with dab's advice one section up on how to improve our coverage of Swiss politics. The alarmist edits made recently in relation to the SVP's electoral victory are bad prose, WP:POV (for undue weight), and violate WP:RECENT. Coverage of the elections and of the SVP by media from English-speaking countries has been mediocre and often sensationalist, because the particular circumstances of Swiss politics are often ignored. It may be more useful to rely on English-language coverage by Swissinfo and by the media of neighbouring countries such as the English version of Spiegel Online. Sandstein 08:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Did you mean my suggestions at ? Lupo 08:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

all of this isn't to say Switzerland hasn't got a history of radical right extremism. This should be discussed under Politics of Switzerland, and could be summarized in a brief sentence here. See also right-wing populism and de:Rechtsextremismus in der Schweiz. The Swiss didn't suddenly discover xenophobia in the 1990s. There have been strong xenophobic forces in the 1930s and in the 1970s. It never came to much in the end. The current situation is rather comparable to the situation in 1971. If it continues to escalate, Switzerland may have a real problem: the country isn't "stable" as a matter of natural law or something. But experience tells that this will all die down again over the next couple of years. dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 09:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * on a related note, have a look at Template:Swiss far right: it has potential, I think, but it is problematic in its present arrangement. It won't do to simply list the SVP alongside the PNOS as "active far right groups". That's cheap polemics of just about the same kind as your average SVP campaign (and I like to think Wikipedia aims higher than that). dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 09:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Politics section #2
User:TerreOcre has rewritten this section, but got reverted by User:CyrilleDunant. I have re-instantiated TerreOcre's edits because I find them a huge improvement over the previous text. There is no reason to revert these changes, TerreOcre tried a bold improvement, and the reason given for the revert ("cuts out too much infos and refs") does not convince me: as I've pointed out above at, the previous text was essentially unsourced, too. The second part of the revert reason ("needs work on the talk page before introduction") is, IMO, completely bogus and has the wiki-way backwards. If someone is bold and makes evidently good faith edits, he does not need to discuss beforehand. Editing articles is encouraged here, and we can always hash out things afterwards on the talk page, if the edits are sensible. TerreOcre's edits were sensible. At the very least, Cyrille should have made an attempt to better explain his revert here. Lupo 08:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The new text should be referenced more thoroughly, though. Lupo 08:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I understand Cyrille's reverting, since I've deleted many things, but I think we have not lost much information, excepting some theoretical considerations about the structure of the executive and two repetitions of the fact that presidency is mainly symbolic.

Still, we need more sources, even if the link to admin.ch leads to many details. Sources about the magic formula and evolution of the parties' share of electorate (http://www.parlament.ch/homepage/wahlen-2007/wahlen-2007-statistiken.htm) would be helpful.

Concordance and the representation of the regions and languages in the government can be shortly mentioned. Regarding the latter, the previous text stated that at least a representative of the Italian-speaking region had to belong to the government, which is wrong.

TerreOcre 15:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Artcile deleted
Someone deleted this article and put in the statement "Switzerland's economy is sucking balls". I will revert it to the last edit before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.31.146.138 (talk) 21:08, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

My edits in the § "Federal state" of the History part
Most of my changes can be verified by any good book about Swiss histoy, I think. Like my french book written by the historian Chevallaz who became later a member of our federal council. For two shifts in years I found web references. The Swiss franc was already introduced 1850 (old text said it came with the constitution of 1874) - here a german source (in part "Die Bundesverfassung von 1848", § Neue Kompetenzen des Bundes, alinea 2). I replaced 1893 by 1891 in the sentence mentioning "strong elements of direct democracy" because the right of initiative (for an amendment of the fed. constit.) was introduced then - here a source for this (german as well - see part "Proporzwahl und Volksinitiative" § Volksinitiative)--UKe-CH (talk) 22:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Theist and believing in a life force
"The 2005 Eurobarometer poll[35] found 48% to be theist, 39% expressing belief in "a spirit or life force", 9% atheist and 4% agnostic." This is more a criticism of the poll, but why isn't "belief in a spirit of life force" theism? Is it just too wishy washy a point of view for proper classification?
 * the result justifies the question: 39% preferred the "wishy washy" position over a straight "there is a God" as describing their beliefs. A "life force" is hardly equivalent to theism, it may refer to all sorts of concepts, including materialist ones. dab (&#55304;&#56435;) 12:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Right to worship
"The new regime, known as the Helvetic Republic, was highly unpopular. It had been imposed by a foreign invading army and destroyed centuries of tradition, including the right to worship, and made Switzerland nothing more than a French satellite state." Is it true that the right of worship was destroyed? Wasn't Napoleon pro-freedom of religion? --212.247.27.168 (talk) 19:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That sounds improbable to me too; I've removed it pending verification. Sandstein (talk) 20:24, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * according to the constitution of the helvetic republic religious freedom was introduced. Sidonius (talk) 15:59, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Is europe a big continent?
I am doing a project about Switzerland and i just wanted to know if Europe was a big continent? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.145.44 (talk) 23:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That depends on what you think is "big". See the articles continent and Europe, and the articles they link to. Please ask further factual questions at WP:RD, you'll get more answers there. Sandstein (talk) 06:32, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Gun politics in Switzerland
I see this article: Gun politics in Switzerland, for which the largest part of the sourcing comes from American pro-gun websites and magazines. Then I see no link to that gun politics article from the parent Switzerland article. I am curious whether the American pro-gun sourcing matches Switzerland national sourcing on the topic of gun politics in Switzerland. SaltyBoatr (talk) 21:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * As a Swiss citizen (and Swiss army officer), all I can tell you after a brief reading is that the article is generally correct, except in some details. (I can't remember anyone ever inspecting my boxed ammo, and at one point they wanted to give me another box as a result of administrative negligence). Also, the information provided at the places marked with [citation needed] seems to be outdated. I think Swiss sources could be found for most of the article's contents with some searching. Sandstein (talk) 22:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * "the largest part of the sourcing comes from american pro-gun websites and magazines". this contention is patently false. there are eleven references for the article. of those, three could be attributed to "american pro-gun websites and magazines". even if we take the total of all inlined refs, there are 18 inlines, of which eight could be described as such. under neither count is "largest part" accurate. it should also be noted that this article, Switzerland, doesn't link to:
 * Swiss cheese
 * Swiss chocolate
 * Swiss guard
 * Swiss watch companies
 * Swiss army knife
 * the absence of a link doesn't necessary have significance.Anastrophe (talk) 08:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The claim that the ban on taking ammunition outside of the firing range is never enforced and rarely even known strikes me as very odd, though. People are not searched when the exit the range, but it's not like you could openly pocket a clip and wander outside. Rama (talk) 10:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Discussing Switzerlands Military Might
I figured since this is call a discussion page we should actually have some sort of discussion so this really has nothing to do with editing the article in any way just a topic I was interested in discussing. Isn't it interesting that Switzerland, possibly the most feared military power in the middle and renaissance age's is now a neutral country that doesnt fight wars and is now one of the strongest economic powers in the world. anyone have any thoughts on the subject. 71.176.177.39 (talk) 17:35, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Err... maybe there are ways to be prosperous without aggressive other countries ? Rama (talk) 17:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Criminal offences and (human) motivations
There is an IP who seems bent on describing Switzerland as a haven for tax evasion, drug traffic and money laundering, in a very much un-nuanced and POV way. Not that those things don't happen, but not quite to the level hinted at, and are the cause of much debate in Switzerland and with the EU. Proper representation of the issue would be good,  see Swiss bank for an example.

Also, bad logic is does not make for very good edits. For example, it would seem that people evade taxes because such behaviour is not a criminal offence...CyrilleDunant (talk) 13:18, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Since tax evasion is not a criminal offence in Switzerland, Swiss authorities do not help the authorities of e. g. France or Germany to identify people who evade taxes in France or Germany and therefore are criminals in France ore Germany. So such criminals in France or Germany (or wherever in the EU) are invited to transfer their money to Switzerland where they do not count as criminals and therefore are safe from prosecution. - What is "bad logic" here? And what is not "proper" with this description of the facts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.76.119.239 (talk) 19:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Swiss law differentiates between tax fraud (which involves falsifying documents etc.) and tax evasion (which means not reporting income or assets). Both are criminal offences in Switzerland, but only the former is (in US terms) a felony, while the latter is only a misdemeanor punishable with a fine. This is why Swiss authorities provide judicial assistance only for tax fraud, not for tax evasion. Sandstein (talk) 19:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

... and that makes it attractive for foreign tax evaders to bank money in Switzerland. More than 3'000'000'000'000 Swiss Francs placed at Swiss Banks belong to foreigners. One can guess that on a considerable amount (some estimates go as far as 90 per cent) of that money taxes have not been paid in the respective home countries. See www.swissbanking.org for further information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.60.68.45 (talk) 23:07, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

(A misdemeanor is not a criminal offence, is it?!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.60.68.45 (talk) 23:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * please consult WP:SOAP. CyrilleDunant (talk) 06:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Please look at the way the issue is tackled in a much more equilibrated way in Swiss bank. Menacing of putting people in prison is not the only way to make them behave: there is an argument to be made in favour of privacy and civil rights (which might include making punishments proportional to the need to curtail the offence).CyrilleDunant (talk) 15:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with User:CyrilleDunant. The differentiation between tax fraud and tax evasion protects the privacy of any Swiss individual, or corporation for that matter. Naturally, this invites foreigners to put money in our banks, and hide it from their own authorities. However, Switzerland has several tax agreements with other countries (some of them just now being revised) to cover for criminal offenses in these countries. For example, each EU citizen looses a substantial amount of his interest being made in Switzerland up front if he does not declare his Swiss account in his country. The percentage lost is big enough (will be augmented to 35% in the near future) to serve as an incentive to declare Swiss Bank Accounts. This, by the way is how Switzerland controls tax evasion by Swiss citizens. 35% are deducted from your annual income from interest, dividends etc, which you can only reclaim if you declare said income and pay taxes due on it. Also, Information about an account can be disclosed if there are reasons for it. This way, the presumtion of innocence is preserved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tprosser (talk • contribs) 14:13, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Latin Europe
Hello ! There is a vote going on at Latin Europe that might interest you. Please everyone, do come and give your opinion and votes. Thank you. The Ogre (talk) 21:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Two map optional display
Hello Switzerland!!! I have something that may interest contributers for this page. In a nut shell, it allows the option to display two maps in your info box, one could be a close up of Switzerland, and another would be Switzerland in a wider European context. This is an example that was being discussed on Scotland's talk page (though I think they have rejected a two map option). Prior to now no one knew that you could have two maps displayed in the info box. For 'smallish' counties the benifits are easy to graps, an up-close view of the country, and a wider contextual visualisation of the country. Dydd da!!

PS: This is an example from the Scotland page, please do not be offended that I display the Scotland info box here. It is only ment as an example.


 * this is madness. The Scottish locator map dispute is childish. We sure as hell do not need two locator maps cluttering articles just because people cannot agree what regions (if any) should be shown in light red. sheesh. dab (𒁳) 20:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Ft
Template:Ft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — pete 14:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Tourism in Swizterland
Is there anything on Wikipedia about tourism in Switzerland? I have checked the Geography section and the Economy section but couldn't find it anywhere. Please help.--Faizaguo (talk) 20:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * have you tried Tourism in Switzerland? --dab (𒁳) 20:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * thanks!--Faizaguo (talk) 20:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Median household income
I am a little confused with the household income data. Yes, in 2003 the Swiss government released data that stated that the median household income for this country was roughly 96,000 CHF, but the conversion to USD, using the Purchase Power Parity parameters, seems to be incorrect to me. It says that, adjusted to PPP, those 96,000 CHF were 89000 dollars. As for 2008, 96000 Swiss Francs were roughly equivalent to 95000 dollars, but using the Purchasing Parity Rate (1.76 for Switzerland in 2003), those figures descend to 55000 dollars. 55000 dollars is still much more than most industrialized nations, and approximately 11000 dollars more than the US figures for that year, but there is a difference of 30000 dollars between this number (adjusted to PPP using official government data and the OECD PP rate) and the data stated in the article.

Oh, that and the reference cited is not working.

I hope we fix this datum. 30 thousand dollars of difference is a margin of error of 60%.--Andres07 (talk) 17:34, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Albanians in Switzerland
I've heard from confidential source that Albanians are most numerous ethnic group in Switzerland after Swiss now. Is that true? Data mentioned here are pretty old.

--Čikić Dragan (talk) 15:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The Swiss are the people of a nation, not an ethnic group. I don't think that many native Swiss would think of themselves as belonging to an ethnic group; rather, most consider themselves to be citizens of a nation, a canton and of a municipality. I don't know whether Albanians are the most numerous foreign ethnic group in Switzerland. That, too, would depend on the definition of "ethnic group", I suppose. Sandstein (talk) 15:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

--Čikić Dragan (talk) 17:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry for discrepancy in using of term. You have a right.

Sports
I was really wondering why there is so much mentioning of icehockey in the sports section (e.g. individual clubs) and hardly anything on soccer / football. I would suggest that the icehockey is trimmed down to the size that football occupies. Greetings --hroest 05:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ice hockey is much more popular in Switzerland than soccer/football. Pascalbrax (talk) 17:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

expansion of early middle ages period in history section out of proportion
Recently, the early middle ages period in the history section has been expanded completely out of proportion to rest of the section. The new paragraphs are well written and provide interesting information but the size of this addition is in no relation to its importance. Not only is it dealing with a period of history that was probaly the least important for the further development of Switzerland but it is also mainly about frankish kings with little connection to Switzerland. Nevertheless, this addition takes up the space of the entire rest of the history section. I propose that the early middle ages period is summarized in a few sentences and the new addition is moved to the history of Switzerland page. 130.60.68.45 (talk) 17:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation
I added pronunciation in IPA for Switzerland in English and the 4 Swiss languages in intro para. Someone please double check for Romansch.Cygnus_hansa (talk) 05:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Racism and Xenophobia section
I've moved this content to Xenophobia, where it is covered in a more appropriate context, and I'd appreciate it if we could come to a consensus here about this. The topic certainly merits coverage, but, per WP:UNDUE and WP:NOT, not at this length and on the main country article. It's not as though we have a Reichskristallnacht in Switzerland right now. The content is also partially inaccurate (the SVP has not consolidated power, right now it is falling apart internally), not written in a neutral tone and poorly sourced.  Sandstein  11:09, 6 July 2008 (UTC)


 * NO, but I am not sure they called themselves xenophobes up to 50% of the population during that time. SSZ (talk) 23:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I've now proposed to cover the xenophobia issue here, with what I think is an appropriate weight for this subject. The "demographics" section provides a better context than the "direct democracy" section.  Sandstein   11:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I assume this may bruise some feelings; something I wish to apologize for; but as long as the ruling national party actively promotes xenophobia, as it has in this current term, it seems noteworthy enough for this to be linked not just at the bottom of the demographics section but also in at least the see also part at the beginning of the politics section. Putting it within modern history is even debatable. Remember that we do include the history of other nations regarding discrimination and these figures are both large and current. It also seems odd that in Talk:Switzerland, an unsigned, anonymous IP editor erased antisemitism on the grounds that it was not xenophobic enough and nobody responded. :)--Thecurran (talk) 02:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I see what you mean. The Swiss People's Party is no longer in government since circa December 2007, though, and some of their less fringe politicians have split off to form the Civic Democratic Party. The xenophobic element of Swiss politics is not currently represented in the national government.  Sandstein   05:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Although they are not in the government, they are still the biggest party and their advertisement campaign carries shocking xenophobic elements. Still there has not been a major event (e.g. attacks, looting etc as other countries have seen them) that would of justify such an paragraph of undue length in the article. In regard of the latest initiatives their point of view does not seem to be shared by the majority of the population. Since this is a very delicate issue and depends on the definition of xenophobia, only well sourced material should enter the article. --hroest 14:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

New animal laws?
Apparently they have new strange laws concerning flushing live goldfish down the toilet, etc.:

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24280581-13762,00.html

Perhaps this should be mentioned here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.36.224.21 (talk) 08:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Federal Palace Picture
I suggest the change of the Federal Palace picture. Reason: The parking lot in front of the palace has been removed since some years. A newer picture is available at the german Wikipedia. --144.85.196.224 (talk) 18:46, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Misstake in section "Politics"
Reading the Politics section, I have noted the following sentence: "The Swiss Parliament consists of two houses: the Council of States which has 46 representatives (two from each canton and one from each half-canton)..." The cantons are 26, therefore if the Council of States has 46 representatives, it cannot have 2 representatives from each canton and one from half canton, since taking only the 2 per canton representative would make 52 representatives. There must be a misstake either in the number of representative "46" or in the number of representatives per canton. Regards, 195.28.224.59 (talk) 09:44, 29 December 2008 (UTC)Milena Grigorova


 * No there is no mistake. There are in fact 20 'normal' cantons and 6 half-cantons. Only recently the habit to call the latter also 'cantons' has been introduced - for more 'political correctness' - so that one now counts 26 cantons (formerly one spoke of 23 cantons, counting half-cantons as ... 1/2); but 20 times 2 + 6 times 1 make 46 (representatives). Of course, nothing essential in the workings has been changed. It seems that the 'hope' that cantons 'split' in the past into 2 'halves' (e.g. Basel into Basel-city and Basel-country at about 1831) would re-unite in the future, has become tinier, so that this may have contributed to the change in speaking about these numbers ... --UKe-CH (talk) 21:31, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

nobel prizes
It says that many Nobel prizes have been awarded to Swiss scientists including Albert Einstein. I'm sure Einstein was German at the start of his life than died an American. Therefore it should be changed. Crackers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.77.224.241 (talk) 21:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * See Albert Einstein. By nationality, he was German, then Swiss, then Swiss and American.  Sandstein   22:27, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

mistake on page
in the first paragraph of this page it sattes that witserland is not amember of the u.n.

in one of the last paragraphs i quote: "In 2002 Switzerland became a full member of the United Nations, leaving the Vatican as the last widely recognized state without full UN membership" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.3.120.42 (talk) 20:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you must have misread something. The introduction says that Switzerland was not a member of the European Union, which is correct. It doesn't even mention the Swiss membership in the United Nations. Lupo 22:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Racism and racist parties
Information about this issues should go in the cultural or politics section. There is a racist party (SVP) in the government coalition and racist attacks are common on foreigners.
 * A recent case was the attack on a pregnant Brazilian woman who as result miscarried twins. The attackers carved on her body with a knife the initials of a racist party, inflicting upon her more than 100 cuts Swiss 'race' attack stuns Brazil.--tequendamia (talk) 06:57, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, this attack occurred, but it is original research to infer from it that "Neo-nazi groups are very active in this highly civilised country and attacks on foreigners happen very often." Such an extraordinary assertion would need a specific citation to a reliable source. The attack itself is a news item and does not belong on the main country article, per WP:NOT.  Sandstein   07:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * This attack was a fake - self inflicted harm, and be the way no baby loss. Ebd of the story. I cite as reference the first hit in google because the other references I know are not in english: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/13/paula-oliviera-attacked-b_n_166649.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.246.31.6 (talk) 12:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no doubt either that the existence of a very popular racist party (Swiss People's Party) should be mentioned in the politics section of this article. Also that racism represent a risk for those foreigners visiting the country (A crime section is required). Why is it missing?--tequendamia (talk) 07:42, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * We can certainly mention the People's Party, but we need a very reliable source to call it "racist"; and we can also write a crime section, but that is not what you have written. You can't make wide-ranging statements of this sort based on one incident without a good source backing them up-  Sandstein   13:31, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, police now state that the woman at issue was not pregnant and may have inflicted the injuries to herself; see .  Sandstein   17:47, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I add the recommendations of the UN Committee against Racism to Switzerland --Dunkedun (talk) 18:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't the tabloid press, or a blog. This stuff has no place here. The actual article about this topic is at Far right in Switzerland, where, based on actual sources, you can read that the far right scene in Switzerland in the 1990 to 2005 period grew, from an estimated 0.003% to 0.016% of the total population. This means that yes, such a scene exists, but also that it is considerably smaller than in other European countries. --dab (𒁳) 16:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Bug
Sorry i have com bugs i can not repair the page, it is too long. Just undo my edits, thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by MadGeographer (talk • contribs) 21:35, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

official names
I wonder whether the mentioning of all the official names in the introduction is necessary - especially since they are already in the box on the right and to me they clog the paragraph unnecessarily. Especially since already the first sentence has a lot about the naming in all languages and nobody uses the formal name of Switzerland; so it does not seem important enough for the introduction. What do you think? --hroest 15:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Especially the pronunciation links are clutter. If we remove those, it will already look more readable. --dab (𒁳) 16:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree but there should still be a section where those appear; just not in the introduction. --hroest 10:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

they can be in a footnote to begin with. But I am not sure I agree we need them. Unless there is some specific reason, pronounciation info of terms in non-English languages should be avoided. People interested in how to pronounce French Suisse should check the French phonology article, or wikt:Suisse. Discussing phonetic details of some language that isn't in the article's focus of attention needlessly distracts from the article topic. --dab (𒁳) 17:56, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I think I would agree to place them in a footnote and I also agree that there might not be many people interested in pronouncing Svizra in Raetoromanisch :-) But it still seems to be common practice to mention that at least somwhere. I think the link to the dictionary is a good solution but someone should include the phonetics there, I guess that wouldnt hurt anybody and a nice compromise? --hroest 18:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

one of the most capitalist economies in the world
is this claim sourced? Otherwise I suggest that we delete it. --hroest 16:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I see that the claim was introduced here by User:Turkuun, maybe he can explain? --hroest 16:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion discussion
Please see Articles for deletion/Swiss migration to the United Kingdom. Badagnani (talk) 16:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Schweiz?
I've never heard of this just being called Schweiz. Usu. die Schweiz I.E. Ich reise in der Schweiz. Could someone confirm this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.10.5.249 (talk) 00:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Switzerland has an article like the iraq, the netherlands, the UK and so on. I am swiss. Schweiz alone doesn't really exist. --SwissAirForceSoldier —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.57.200.56 (talk) 20:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

In English, it's "the UK", "the Netherlands" but just "Germany", "France", "Switzerland", without the definite article. In German, it is die Schweiz, die Niederlande, das Vereingte Königreich but just Deutschland, Frankreich. As long as we're discussing German usage, we should note the presence of the definite article. --dab (𒁳) 10:05, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned article: Outline of Switzerland
This was moved into article namespace the other day. It isn't linked from anywhere yet. -- User:Docu


 * We're still working on the set of country outlines, and will add links to them as time allows. Currently, the outline is linked to from Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge.  The Transhumanist  01:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

what is it doing in article namespace? I have redirected it as blatant WP:CFORK. --dab (𒁳) 10:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * It's a type of list, and falls under WP:LISTS. I've reverted the redirect, as it punches a hole in Wikipedia's Outline of knowledge, which includes the entire set of outline articles on Wikipedia.  All the other countries have outlines.  You should try and make Outline of Switzerland the best in the collection.  For the best ones so far, see the Outline of Japan, Outline of Vatican City, Outline of Iceland, Outline of Thailand, Outline of Taiwan, and Outline of the United Kingdom.  The Transhumanist  01:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

these are article indices. It is bad enough that you keep insisting on keeping them in namespace, you don't need to link them from everywhere because they are "orphaned". Link them from Portal:Contents, and nowhere else. --dab (𒁳) 19:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Helvetica/Helvetia
It should be "Confœderatio Helvetia," not Helvetica. The documentary Helvetica discusses how the creators of the font came up with the name by using the Latin name for the region, Helvetia. As far as I know, Helvetica is only the name of the font.

Helvetia can be seen on coins and stamps... MM962 (talk) 21:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

It's Helvetia but Confœderatio Helvetica "Helvetic Confederation". What is your point? --dab (𒁳) 10:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

on my swiss 5 cent. coin I can cleary read Confœderatio Helvetica Pascalbrax (talk) 08:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully, you have more than just .05 swissies at your disposal ;-) But on the topic. Helvetia refers to the country, helvetica is the latin adjective in its female nominative flection, meaning swiss. Tprosser (talk) 13:46, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * …and regardless, " confoederatio helvetica " is what the confederation uses. ¦ Reisio (talk) 14:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Einstein
Uhh, I know both states are Germanic, but is Albert Einstein, Swiss or German? Cause another article says he was born in Ulm, German Empire. And Ulm is still part of Germany till this day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Borninbronx10 (talk • contribs) 13:00, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Both. Please read our article on Albert Einstein.  Sandstein   13:12, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * However, of the four great Scientists depicted in the article, Einstein was the only one not born swiss. The article should at least point this out. Tprosser (talk) 13:38, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I see no reason to depict Einstein. These thumbnail collages are an abomination anyway. Just show a mugshot of Euler. Or none at all. --dab (𒁳) 19:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

It is difficult to choose only one portrait in an article like this. In any case I would represent Albert Einstein, he is the most famous Swiss person of all time according to a survey by the SonntagsZeitung (see ). MadGeographer (talk) 21:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Politics
I removed the portrait of the president because it seems redundant with the photo of the federal council. Also the president has no powers above the other Councillors so I think showing the whole federal council gives a better idea of what is politics in Switzerland. MadGeographer (talk) 20:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Suisse romande
I am surprised there is no article on Suisse romande or Romandie as a separate article (see French wikipedia ) and the 3 other linguistic regions of Switzerland. The Suisse romande regions consists of a number of cantons which, together, have distinctive characteristics that separate the region from, for example, Swiss Germans (occasionally called Suisse totos :-) by the Romands). Trompeta (talk) 18:47, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Romandie is a section redirect. There could certainly be a standalone article on the Romandie in principle, it just appears that so far nobody has taken the trouble to write it. --dab (𒁳) 10:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Semi-direct democracy
To my understanding Switzerland is only a semi-direct democracy (as also stated on the german wiki-page). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Generic wiki user (talk • contribs) 11:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Early history
Apparently much of the section hasn't anything to do with Switzerland. I would suggest remove most of it or put back a previous version. Maybe we could use the text later on a more specific page.

And how about making it a featured article? MadGeographer (talk) 14:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what exactly doesn't belong; the section discusses the origins of the area that now encompasses the modern day Swiss Confederation. Could you please point out the specific parts that you believe don't belong? I am quite interested in helping to make this into a featured article, but it still needs many more references. If you don't know already, there is a 'refTools' gadget in 'my preferences' which allows you, when editing a page, to quickly enter information into the different fields and it will create a citation for you to insert. Hayden120 (talk) 01:03, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Except the first two paragraphs the section contains many informations which are far too specific for this article. I would include them in Early history of Switzerland. I will see for the missing references.. MadGeographer (talk) 13:07, 22 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I moved the text to Talk:Early history of Switzerland, but i'm not even sure if it could be useful there. mge o  talk 15:50, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Early history (proposed version)
The earliest known cultural tribes of the area were members of the Hallstatt and La Tène cultures. The La Tène culture developed and flourished during the late Iron Age from around 450 BC, possibly under some influence from the Greek and Etruscan civilizations. One of the most important tribal groups in the Swiss region was the Helvetii. In 15 BC, Tiberius I, who was destined to be the second Roman emperor, and his brother, Drusus, conquered the Alps, integrating them into the Roman Empire. The area occupied by the Helvetii—the namesakes of the later Confoederatio Helvetica—first became part of Rome's Gallia Belgica province and then of its Germania Superior province, while the eastern portion of modern Switzerland was integrated into the Roman province of Raetia.



In the Early Middle Ages, from the fourth century AD, the western extent of modern-day Switzerland was part of the territory of the Kings of the Burgundians. The Alemanni settled the Swiss plateau in the fifth century AD and the valleys of the Alps in the eighth century AD, forming Alemannia. Modern-day Switzerland was therefore then divided between the kingdoms of Alemannia and Burgundy. The entire region became part of the expanding Frankish Empire in the sixth century, following Clovis I's victory over the Alemanni at Tolbiac in 504 AD, and later Frankish domination of the Burgundians.

After its extension under Charles the Great, the Frankish empire was divided by the Treaty of Verdun in 843. The territories of nowadays Switzerland became divided into Middle Francia and East Francia until the were reunified under the Holy Roman Empire around 1000 AD.

By 1200 AD, the Swiss plateau comprised the dominions of the houses of Savoy, Zähringer, Habsburg and Kyburg. Some regions (Uri, Schwyz, Unterwalden, later known as Waldstätten) were accorded the Imperial immediacy to grant the empire direct control over the mountain passes. When the Kyburg dynasty fell in 1264 AD, the Habsburgs under King Rudolph I (Holy Roman Emperor in 1273) extended its territory to the eastern Swiss plateau.

Introduction
I was concerned with the readability of the intro because of the high number of names and the density of information at the beginning. I would make the first paragraph shorter so that the casual reader can directly go to the second one and avoid the "boring" first part (something I usually do). So here is a proposition with 4 paragraphs and additional info. Your comments and suggestions welcome. mge o talk 21:56, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks good; the current version is especially lacking in regards to Switzerland's culture. There doesn't seem to be any disagreement, so you could go ahead and put it in. Hayden120 (talk) 04:56, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Central vs. Western Europe
Yes, it will be possible to produce any number of sources that place Switzerland either in Central or in Western Europe. But looking at the Central Europe vs. Western Europe article, it transpires that Switzerland forms the extreme southwestern tip of some definitions of Central Europe, while it is well within any definition of Western Europe. It would make more sense for the lead to place Switzerland in Western Europe than in Central Europe (assuming that it does place it in either) --dab (𒁳) 13:16, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe we could place in both, such as "a country located in Central or Western Europe (depending on the definition)". Uirauna (talk) 18:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I added a few lines in Geography of Switzerland for the ones who are interested. I also think it makes more sense to indicate Western Europe in the lead. mge o  talk 15:08, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

world economic forum as international organization ?
The third paragraph states:

"Switzerland is home to many international organisations, including the World Economic Forum, the Red Cross, the World Trade Organization and the second largest UN office."

But the WEF is not an "international organisations" but a non-profit foundation, and would likely not qualify on the list of international organizations based in Geneva.

A Swiss government page (http://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/home/topics/intorg/inorch.html) states that "Switzerland ... has concluded a “headquarters agreement” with 25 international organizations: 22 organizations have their headquarters in Geneva, 2 in Berne and 1 in Basel."

So what about reformulating as: "Switzerland is home to many international organisations, including seven organisations of the UN System, the second largest UN office, the Red Cross, or the World Trade Organization." ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.109.180.138 (talk) 08:07, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * sounds good, but I would also mention the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Greetings --hroest 12:14, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * An international organization cannot also be non-profit? WEF is listed under "International organizations" in the Geneva article, as well as on List of international organizations based in Geneva. They may not be intergovernmental, but I don't think the Red Cross is either. --skew-t (talk) 06:29, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe the WEF has more to do with economy than international organisations, but I'm not sure. mge o  talk 15:11, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Logotype in front of the WEF's official website: World Economic Forum: Committed to Improving the State of the World This seems to me like being pretty international. It is also an organization (profit or non profit does not matter). Therefore IMHO it is effectively an international organization, not only concerned with solely "economy", as the improvement of the world concerns all the various aspects of Life. André Malreaux dixit: le XX1ème siècle sera spirituel ou ne sera pas (not religious, but base on an all encompassing system not only economic based):-) claude (talk) 18:33, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Traditionnally, an international organization must 1) be based on an international treaty, meaning an agreement between states, and 2) the constituting members (which compose the decision-making organ) must be states. This is simply because the decision of IOs usually have a legal impact on the internal rules of a state. It is quite obvious, therefore, that private enterprises or individuals cannot be involved, outside of usual advisory or observer roles. There are exceptions. For example, the OSCE is an IO with no founding treaty, but is instead based on the Helsinki declaration. The ICRC, although based on a treaty, only has Swiss citizens acting in their private capacity in its general assembly. The EU, incidentally, is usually not considered an IO, because there is an independent decision-making process which does not involve states (the Commission).

The WEF is neither based on an international treaty, its decision-making organ is composed of individuals acting in their private capacity. It is not a treaty.

For any further explanations I refer you to any introductory textbook on international law.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.2.0.153 (talk) 06:04, November 3, 2009


 * You seem to be talking specifically about intergovernmental organizations. The more general term international organization can include nongovernmental organizations as well, which are not necessarily based on treaties or composed of member states (e.g. Doctors Without Borders). With so many international organizations in the country, WEF could be replaced without rewording the sentence if its placement is troublesome. --skew-t (talk) 05:10, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Districts of Switzerland
Proposal to rename the articles about individual districts at Talk:Districts of Switzerland TrueColour (talk) 21:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Racist Bigotry
The first name being used for Switzerland constantly becomes "Naziland", and, as a Swiss German, I find this highly offensive. Whoever the person is that is doing this should be stopped. This is just ******* pathetic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.68.76 (talk) 14:03, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

It was just vandalism. Sheesh. It was online for all of six minutes, five minutes less than it took you to formulate your rant. --dab (𒁳) 14:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE?
Following the recent referendum, there have been a lot of edits. Many of them are just vandalism and easily reverted. User Wormcast, in contrast, has provided an addition that is both well-written and well-sourced. I'm concerned, however, that it might be a bit WP:UNDUE to devote around 30% of the section on Swiss culture to describe how xenophobic the Swiss are, even if those claims are backed up by reliable sources.Jeppiz (talk) 04:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. While the information provided may be "news" for the moment, the figures themselves are not particularly noteworthy.  One of the references has a quote suggesting Swiss xenophobia is "in the middle" as compared to its neighbors.  I would be (really) surprised if the USA, for example, compared favorably to "one in three Swiss is xenophobic, nearly one in three are Islamophobic, 40% do not agree entirely with gender equality, and one in five is antisemitic".  The more xenophobic states won't be polling their inhabitants about it. ¦ Reisio (talk) 05:02, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That is one of the two reasons I reacted to the passage. Putting it like that, without any comparison, the implicit claim is that the Swiss are particularly xenophobic, and that is hardly the case. From what I've seen in opinion polls in other countries, both European and Arab, Christian and Moslem countries, the figures are often even higher. So that is one reason, the other being that I think it is relatively marginal to whole Swiss culture despite now occupying a (too?) prominent place in that section.Jeppiz (talk) 05:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello folks. A couple of points: first, I admit that the addition is a bit heavy relative to the length of the section. However, I felt that a less rigorously supported treatment of the subject would have instead resulted in claims of baselessness. Second, with respect to WP:UNDUE, prior to my edits, more than 10% of the culture section was devoted to uncritically lauding Switzerland's humanitarian tradition. In light of the relatively steady stream of rather unhumanitarian news flowing out of the country over the past decade or so (the nazi gold scandal, the revelations about its use of Jewish forced labor and its rejection of Jewish refugees at the border during WW2, the victory of the People's Party under Christoph Blocher, the finding by the country's own Federal Commission on Racial Discrimination that its citizenship system is 'racist', and now this), the section seemed like a bit of a puff piece. While Switzerland may not be more xenophobic than the average European county (and I am not convinced of this), it is biased coverage to plug it for its well-known tradition of tolerance and humanitarianism and not mention the rapid and well-reported tarnishing of its halo --Wormcast (talk) 07:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps a remedy would be to move the bulk of the edit to a footnote, while keeping the essential point? Or possibly to keep the culture section a harmless discourse on chocolate and languages and move both the humanitarian tradition claims and the xeonophobic claims to the currently rather skimpy and uncriticalHuman rights in Switzerland article? ---Wormcast (talk) 07:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC)


 * “the nazi gold scandal”, this was a matter of international trade during WW2 and has nothing to do with the subject of humanitarianism, unless you meant the World Jewish Congress lawsuit against Swiss banks, which did indeed contribute to the current level of anti-Semitism as it was seen as extortion, and was surrounded with misinformation and libel from foreign (particularly US) medias.
 * “the revelations about its use of Jewish forced labor”: nothing of the sort happened in Switzerland or by the Swiss People.
 * “its rejection of Jewish refugees at the border during WW2”: this point is granted, but should be looked at in a more general discussion about the refugee laws in the thirties and forties. I’ll also point out Switzerland harboured more Jewish refuges than any other country.
 * “the victory of the People's Party under Christoph Blocher”: as conservative as the SVP might be, it is not a far right party. That’s like blaming the US because the Republicans won the 2004 election. To take France as example, the People's Party is the equivalent of the UMP, NOT Le Pen's Front National.
 * “the finding by the country's own Federal Commission on Racial Discrimination that its citizenship system is 'racist'”, I’m going to add some precision to this. It concerns some communes’ way of granting citizenship (though a vote). This was not on the Federal level and doesn’t concern Switzerland as a whole (the commission’s reaction however does). Granting citizenship is done at the commune’s level and not on the federal level, and only nine out of the 2636 communes did that through a vote (rather than a specialised commission). Also the conclusion wasn’t that the system was ‘racist’ but that voting to grant citizenship was unconstitutional.


 * While the article you cited is pertinent, I’m going to point out the original study the article uses as reference: http://www.nfp40plus.ch/m/mandanten/174/topic4328/story9381.html (it has a .pdf of the study's results in English)
 * You only took the parts of that study that benefited your viewpoint. You skipped the parts about 90% of the population explicitly rejecting right-wing extremism, 85% supporting penal pursuits for people inciting to racism, 90% favourable to the amelioration of equal opportunity, etc, and that the study points out that the attitude of tolerance is preponderant.


 * I am in no way refuting that there is a problem of xenophobia in Switzerland (specifically prejudice and ethnocentrism), but the figures are hardly different from any other western country (or should we add a chapter about xenophobia to every country's articles?). That and it contrasts with figures that show the majority of the population in support of tolerance, integration and the fight against extremism and racism. Those don't overshadow the country's centuries' old humanitarian traditions: http://www.bfm.admin.ch/bfm/en/home/themen/asyl/humanitaere_tradition.html.
 * On a personal note while I am very disappointed by the result of the vote on minarets I do not see this as a case of rampant racism but rather as a fear of islamist extremism and general ignorance of Muslim culture. The current Gaddafi/Lybian problem also certainly had an influence.


 * “While Switzerland may not be more xenophobic than the average European county (and I am not convinced of this)”: the last part of this comment could cast doubt on your ability to edit this article in an unbiased view, but nevertheless I’ll assume good faith on your part. Don Durandal (talk) 11:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)


 * (1) With respect to the dormant WW2 accounts, I and many others find it hard to understand how any ethical handling of this matter of international trade would require covert shredding of relevant bank records during an investigation. The whistleblower, if I recall correctly, fled Switzerland out of concern for his personal safety.


 * (2) With respect to your out-of-hand dismissal of the claim that the Swiss used Jewish forced labor during the war, perhaps you were not aware of this event because the history books of Switzerland make no mention of it. I read about it in the Danish media, but it was widely reported. See for instance and Bergier_Commission


 * (3) With respect to Switzerland's turning away of 10,000 - 24,000 Jews at the border to face a more-or-less certain death, the Swiss government-appointed Bergier Commission concluded that "'Switzerland, and in particular its political leaders, failed when it came to generously offering protection to persecuted Jews. This is all the more serious in view of the fact that the authorities, who were quite aware of the possible consequences of their decision, not only closed the borders in August 1942, but continued to apply this restrictive policy for over a year. By adopting numerous measures making it more difficult for refugees to reach safety, and by handing over the refugees caught directly to their persecutors, the Swiss authorities were instrumental in helping the Nazi regime to attain its goals.'" In particular, the ICE found that the Swiss government on its own initiative prior to the outbreak of the war requested that the Nazi authorities stamp all passports of German Jews with a "J" as the Swiss did not recognize the right to asylum of those fleeing racial persecution.


 * (4) With respect to your claim that the SVP is nothing more than a conservative party, I remind you of their recent campaign poster showing a bunch of white sheep kicking a black sheep off of the Swiss flag. I think that this speaks for itself. As repellent as I personally find many of the policies of the American Republicans, you will not find anything so blatantly xenophobic and racist as this coming out of their national organization.


 * (5) Concerning Switzerland's practice of allowing local communities to use secret ballot votes to decide whether someone can become a citizen, a practice that results in Muslims and people from the Balkans and Africa being the most likely to be rejected, I defer to your local knowlege about just how widespread the practice is. I wonder, has the national government acted to outlaw this "unconstitutional" method, or does it continue?


 * (6) In defense of the charge that I cherrypicked the article: I was not claiming that Switzerland was a hotbed of violent extremists - only that the current levels of xenophobia and group-based intolerance being reported fly in stark contrast to the egalitarian, humanitarian reputation that the country has enjoyed, and which this article was trumpeting. The information I added served to correct the balance of the impression given by the article, not paint a picture of the Swiss as Nazis. If I had been attempting to support such a claim, then failing to include the other findings of the study would have been intellectually dishonest.


 * (7) Concerning your questioning of whether I am sufficiently unbiased to edit this article: I find this odd: I said that I am not convinced that Switzerland is not more xenophobic than the average European county. Surely admitting a lack of being convinced about a factual claim is a statement of openmindedness, rather than a dogmatic and unquestioning acceptance of a traditional reputation. For me the answer to such an empirical question is ultimately to be found in evidence. The EU has conducted a series of surveys on racism and xenophobia, which did not of course include Switzerland. Only now, with similar data emerging from Switzerland can a proper comparison to its neighbors start to be performed.


 * Finally, I would like to raise a question: how do you all think that the international community and media would react if a politically moderate, avowedly secular Islamic-majority country like Turkey were to pass a constitutional amendment banning the construction of church steeples? You can bet that, at the very least, they would lose all claim to any chance of EU membership; and their claim of religious secularism would be in tatters. --Wormcast (talk) 21:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Not a forum
I would like to point that Wikipedia is WP:NOTAFORUM. It seems clear that both Wormcast and Don Durandal have strong and personal opinions about this matter. Wikipedia is not the place to discuss them. I suggest we simply removed both the claim of Switzerland being humanitarian and xenophobic. Both are POV statements that are neither relevant here nor verifiable. (As a short answer to Wormcast's question, Turkey has actively discouraged renovation of churches and closed the Orthodox priest seminary, but it is also true that these moves have been criticized. However, there is no relation whatsoever between this and Swiss culture).Jeppiz (talk) 02:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Point taken, Jeppiz - I didn't intend to write an essay, but did feel that I had to respond to the comments made. My original concern was, and still is, to correct what I perceive to be an unjustifiably flattering treatment of Switzerland's cultural attitudes towards human rights in the article. This can be done either through addressing the positive and negative (the latter of which, I note, keeps getting deleted) or as you suggest, by removing both. --Wormcast (talk) 03:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)