Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dalmatian Italians


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was no consensus to delete in this mess of a discussion, therefore default to keep. Whether the article should be expanded or renamed is not a matter for this AfD. Sandstein 23:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Dalmatian Italians

 * - (View AfD) (View log)


 * Currently Croatia has a minority of approximately 30,000 Italians. The vast majority of these live in Istria, not in Dalmatia. The article is about a fictitious entity. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 16:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Italians were an important presence in Dalmatia till recent times, as stated in the inserted links. DIREKTOR is used to perform disturbing actions to enoforce nationalistic POV. The present action is, simply, useless--Giovanni Giove 16:32, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Aside from Giovanni Giove's uncivil attitude, the simple problem is there are no Italians in Dalmatia. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 16:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This is obviously a very controversial topic, but let's look at it objectively without getting into emotional bias: It is true there are few Italians left in Dalmatia, but there is a long history of Italians in Dalmatia, and political, cultural and economic ties to Venice. Up until the 1950s there were significant resident poulations that called themselves Dalmatian Italians- granted many were ethnic Croatian. This article is about the historical group and should expand and focus beyond what is in the Dalmatia history article. I say no to deletion... but let's stay neutral! Mariokempes 17:26, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This is for deletion. Italo-Dalmatians was the name used by the members of Autonomist party in Dalmatia in 19th century. It doesn't really describe some special unique ethnicity. The most of these autonomists were actually Croats. Leaving this topic IS emotional bias! Zenanarh 17:08, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't get your point. Who said anything about a special ethnicity? First off, I have absolutely no ties to the area and I am trying to look at this from a neutral point of view. The fact that both sides claim a form of revisionist history alone suggests this topic has merit. I personally have met many Italians that left Dalmatia in the 1950s. Many have Croatian surnames and others have immigrant roots from southern Italy. Nonetheless, they still consider Dalmatia their home but they also consider themselves Italian (dalmati as they call themselves). Dalmatian Italians may just be a forced, non-ethnic, political creation (I don't know) but they did (or do?) exist- is this not enough to write about without getting bent out of shape? I'm not saying either side is right or wrong- nor do I really care to stir a heated debate. I think there is material, however, for a valid article with a neutral point of view... showing all valid viewpoints and offering a reader like me some insight. On the off chance that you agree with me but you think this article is just the wrong place, please enlighten me. Mariokempes 23:17, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

The article "Dalmatian Italians" is ordinary case of POV content forking, see WP:FORK. Simply, this article should be part of the "Italians in Croatia". This article was created by user:London321. He's not active anymore, and has made less than 100 edits, mostly on few articles (Jeronymites, Dalmatian Italians, Dubrovnik Highlands, Viduzia, Travunia, Hieronymites, Chakavian dialect, Korzulot) and in few days - 16 November 2006 and 12 February 2007, and 26 Feb 2007 and 14 March 2007. E.g., in his version of article Jeronymites (originally a redirect), which is typical POV forking and original research, he made 30 edits in one day. Those edits were of unnecessary type; these can be made with "show preview". That was typical collecting of necessary number of edits for voting right on Wikipedia. Later, the content of the article Jeronymites, was deleted, and original redirect was restored (JzG's comment was:The content as of today appears to be either unverifiable or undue weight. Restore the original redirect.). Interesting, the IP-user Special:Contributions/195.194.240.65 was of similar interest and bad knowledge/POV spreading on the similar topics (e.g., here). I have strong reasons to believe that user:London321 was a sockpuppet of Giovanni Giove (WP:SOCK). Later, when London321 "disappeared", Giovanni Giove emerged with stubbornly defending this POV fork/orig. research article. Even if it's not the case of sockpuppeteering, this article should be deleted. Any work regarding this matter should be made as part of article Italians of Croatia (like in: Czechs in Croatia, Germans in Croatia). Kubura 06:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 10:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * KUBURA I ASK YOU TO APOLOGIZE, for the accusation of sockpuppetry.--Giovanni Giove 15:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Assuming this was a POV fork, wouldn't merging it into Istrian exodus be an appropriate solution, so that we can at least have the neutrality dispute there? That article indicates (though without references) that Italians lived in the Dalmatian city of Zadar until the exoduses.--Chaser - T 18:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. There's very little content here, and it's obviously a controversial subject.  If we're going to have controversy, let's have it be over a significant article instead of a one-liner.  Powers T 13:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This is obviously a stub, it well referencied and it shall be expanded.Giovanni Giove 15:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Then expand it. As the article stands right now, it's not useful.  Powers T 17:56, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge into Dalmatian. Arf-aderci! User:Mandsford 00:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Expand. As Giovanni Giove wrote: "This is obviously a stub, it is well referencied and it shall be expanded"; and as Mariokempes wrote: "I say no to deletion... but let's stay neutral!"--Brunodam 02:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. As other solution, it can be modified and added to the article "Italians in Croatia". Kubura 08:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Rename and modify in Italians in Croatia, per Kubura. Mir Harven 18:34, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Where is this "Italians in Croatia" article? From what I can see, it doesn't yet exist. Will this issue simple be "transferred" to the new article? Will "Dalmatian Italians" redirect to there rather than be deleted? Mariokempes 19:01, 25 September2007 (UTC)
 * You're right, it should be created. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 14:18, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete or Rename to Italians in Croatia, Croats in Italy, Frenchmen in Spain, Bugs on the Moon etc... Zenanarh 23:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Italians in Dalmatia are a minority, not a bunch of tourists. Furthermore, one with an indubitable encyclopedic noteworthiness.--Victor falk 14:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No, Italians no longer constitute a national minority in Dalmatia (though there are about 30,000 of them in Istria and the area around Rijeka). The last remnants in Zadar (Zara) disappeared after WW2. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 14:18, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Doesn't matter. Since when are historical minorities not an encyclopedic subject?--Victor falk 14:29, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right, of course (my family used to be part of this same minority), but the historical aspect of this minority (and its influence) must be mentioned in the title. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 14:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, there still is Trieste and those 3000 in Istria, so historical in the Title would be misleading
 * How? Trieste and Istria are not part of Dalmatia. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 14:45, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Expand 2. Dalmatia goes geographically from Trieste (Italy) to Scutari (northern Albania) and historically from Istria to the coast of Montenegro.


 * Geographically it is impossible to include the Dalmatian Italians only inside the coast of Croatia, because they live even in Italian Istria, Slovenian Istria and Montenegro. The article "Italians in Croatia" is related to a nation (Croatia) that has a huge part of the Dalmatian coast, but not all.


 * Historically, even if we consider the contemporary historical Dalmatia (from Fiume/Rijeka to Cattaro/Kotor) we have to pinpoint that there are two countries involved here: Croatia and Montenegro. And actually still live 300 and 500 Italians in the first and in the second of these two countries.


 * I believe the article must be expanded, with the inclusion of an historical and geographical section if we want to make a good "neutral" and impartial wikipedian article. Allow me to repeat, as Mariokempes wrote: "I say no to deletion... but let's stay neutral!--Brunodam 22:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Brunodam your discussion has big problem. First historical Dalmatia was a part of Roman Empire province Illyricum. In that case Dalmatia was from Istria to Kotor but also deep into the inland reaching Panonia. More precisely western part of that Dalmatia was sub-province Liburnia. But that historical Dalmatia has nothing to do with any kind of Italians or in other words there were no Italians there in that age.
 * Byzantine province Dalmatia in the early Medieval were actually a few cities of "modern" Dalmatia, however from that age Dalmatia was concerned to be the same territory as at present, which means from Ravni Kotari (plains behind Zadar) to Dubrovnik or Pelješac peninsula. Previously mentioned Liburnia transformed into first Croatian Medieval State in 9th century. Both were the parts of Croatin Kingdom in 10th century. Once again there were no Italians there.
 * Some limited influx of Italians was recorded during Venetian rulling in Dalmatia, but real arrival of Italians to Dalmatia occured in the end of 18th and in 19th century but also in 20th century-these were soldiers. This Dalmatia doesn't include Istria, MonteNegro, Albania. Zenanarh 23:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Zenanarth, we Italians did not appeared suddenly in the 18th century, as you know. We Italians as a national entity were created from the union of Venetians, Lombards, Sicilians, etc..in the nineteenth century, and so when we write or talk of Venetians we mean Italians "before the Unification of the Kingdom of Italy". This unification process includes even the Italian populations that did not participate in the Kingdom of Italy, like the Dalmatian Italians. The problem is that you (and other Croats) keep repeating that the Venetians in Dalmatia were not Italians..... and this goes against the main logic of our "Unification" process of all the neolatin people in the Italian peninsula and surrounding areas (like Malta, Nice, Dalmatia, etc..). This logic (similar to the one of the Germans in their "unification" areas) make us consider the Venetians in Dalmatia (who assimilated the Neolatin original Dalmatians, descendants of the romanized Illyrians) as "Dalmatian Italians". Many historians in western Europe pinpoint the similarities between the Sudeten German people and the Dalmatian Italians, and always call in their books Germans the Sudeten German people and Italians the Dalmatians Italians. Of course, all this (Italian and Slav point of view) should be written in the article "Dalmatian Italians", as an historical section. And the article should even have the expansion related to "contemporary" Dalmatian Italians (meaning those after the creation of the Kingdom of Italy in 1861). As you probably know, between 1941 and 1943 the Kingdom of Italy had the "Provincia di Cattaro" in actual Montenegro. It would be a mistake to put those Dalmatian Italians of Cattaro/Kotor between the "Italians of Croatia". And, of course, to place Cattaro/Kotor in Croatia would be a falsification of contemporary history, don't you believe? Regards.--Brunodam 03:59, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Brunodam I understand what you mean. But maybe you didn't understand me. When I say Venetians I count them as Italians, don't worry. But the real problem are Dalmatians, precisely those Dalmatians who were Neo-Latin or Dalmatian language speakers (Romanized Illyrians). These Dalmatian speakers were actually assimilated by Croats or Slavs if you like it, from 9th to 14th century. Until 15th century small number of them survived as Neo-Latin speakers and they were mostly some noblemen or some cives (citizens) in Dalmatian cities, but also they were bilinguals. Words of Dalmatian language entered in Chakavian dialect of Croatian language very early. Chakavian is one of the oldest Slavic dialects in the western Balkans and is full of Neo-Latin (Dalmatian language) words. Or in other words almost all Dalmatian speakers became Chakavian speakers long before coming of the Italians (Venetians). Also Croatian noblemen who were the majority of the Dalmatian noblemen already in 13th century were using Latin format of writing their names. Very good example is the city of Zadar, where almost all names found in the documents in 13th and 14th century were Slavic names written more or less by "Neo-Latin grammatics". So it's absolutely uncorrect to say that Venetians assimilated Neo-Latin speakers, since until 16th century they had been already assimilated by Croats. Also it’s uncorrect to point that there was some continuation between Dalmatians and Venetians by means of ethnicity. There's another important fact which I've detected in some Dalmatia related articles - Italian users like to point that Dalmatia was Venetianized during the Republic ages. The truth is that administration of Dalmatian cities was Venetianized (documents for Republic usage) and noble society was Venetianized in some degree. Native noblemen who were participating in the public life of Dalmatia and were using Venetian language didn’t become Venetians just like that. In Venice they were not concerned to be Venetians, they were called Schiavoni – Slavs! In the same time Venetians didn’t significantly populate Dalmatia. Also some of Venetians who arrived to Dalmatia were Slavized. A Venetian trade unionist Giovanni Battista Giustiniani was passing through Dalmatian cities in 16th century and was sending reports to the Republic government in Venice. He noted that Dalmatians didn’t speak Italian nor Venetian and they didn’t understand it. Only a small part of Dalmatians did, people connected to political life of Dalmatia – noblemen. In addition most of them were bilinguals actually! Is it enough to call these people Italians? Certainly not. However there was a small number of these famillies that were totally Italianized. How many of them? A few families in each city? Maybe. “Italo-Dalmatian” was name used in 19th century by members of Autonomist Dalmatian party who were, once again, mostly bilinguals. If you want to write about these people you must be conscious of the fact that majority of them cannot be called Italians, since they were not. That Italo- goes for language used by them as a symbol of distinguishing from the masses, with purpose to save their positions and honors in isolated circles of minor population – members of their families. Even many of them didn’t try to recognise themselves as Italians, but more likely as Dalmatians, including Tarallo – their  “spiritus movens” who noted a few times that Dalmatians were nothing like Italians. If you want to write objectively about these people I can help you a lot with finding the documents in the Dalmatian cities archives, but if you want to POVerize it, I will be your first opponent. I think you are normal person (nothing like G.G.). Cheers. Zenanarh 12:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your Croatian explanations, Zenanarth, but I believe you are confusing the Dalmatians (with their extinct Dalmatian language) with the Morlachs (neolatin population of the internal Roman Dalmatia, assimilated by the Slavs from 9th to 14th century). Please, go to on the History of Dalmatia, and to  on the Italians in Dalmatia, from an Italian point of view.


 * Anyway, I believe this is not the place to discuss this topic (to discuss and decide if Dalmatia is Italian or Slav reminds me the "neverending" bizantine discussions about the sex of the Angels...), but to decide about the deletion of the article "Dalmatian Italians". And I strongly support the opinion of Giovanni Giove. Regards.--Brunodam 02:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Nice try Brunodam, but no, I didn't confuse the Dalmatians with the Morlachs. Morlachs were the most possibly the descendents of Illyrians too, but you must know that there were many different Illyrian tribes in the western Balkans, historian A. Stipčević noted around 70 tribes! Some of these tribes were of nomadic culture. Morlachs were isolated Romance speaking shephards and nomads in the mountains of Dalmatian inland in the early Medieval. Zenanarh 16:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Zenanarth, there are many books about the Morlachs. They were not an "isolated" group of romance speaking sheperds, but a huge community (during the Middle Ages) in the mountains of internal Dalmatia, Bosnia, Herzegovina and Montenegro. See my map on Commons (Image:Copy (2) of Bosna.jpg|thumb|300px|left|The Vlachs of Herzegovina and Montenegro during the Miggle Age (in red colour)). If you are interested for more information (even from Slav authors), please go to my Blog (brunodam.blog.kataweb.it/) on the Vlachs in the Balkans. Regards. --Brunodam 02:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * You are really funny guy if you think that I've confused Morlachs from the mountains with Dalmatians in the islands, cities and its surroundings, that's all. Concerning the population of Dalmatia in the Medieval, they were culturally "isolated". And they were last Slavized when it already had happened to others (Dalmatians). For example in 10th century the population of the islands were Slavs, around 70%. In 13th and 14th century the names found in the documents in the cities were almost all of Slavic format. Venetian and Italian names recorded in the documentation up to 15th century were only merchants in transition.Zenanarh 13:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * We are totally out of the topic, Zenanarth. Let's go back to the approval or denial of the article "Dalmatian Italians", which I approve. And sincerely I wonder how - with the lack of original documents and precise data from the 10th century, a lack that every serious scholar complains - you seriously claim that "around 70%" of the population of the dalmatian islands in that century was Slav......Be careful with the manipulations done by the dictatorship propaganda during the Mussolini and Tito years: many Italian books of the fascist era were manipulated in their data and information, but even many Yugoslav books suffered the same problem during the Tito era. Unfortunately, this is going to be my last reply to you, because of work. My pleasure (to deal with a "normal" -as you wrote- Croat). Ciao. --Brunodam 14:35, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * You're right we're out of topic. Let's end it. BTW there is no lack of original documents. It exist in historical archives in each of the city we're discussing of. Cheers. Zenanarh 06:27, 29 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Here's what I propose. Perhaps Giovanni Giove and Brunodam can agree to rename it "Italian Culture in Dalmatia" or "Italian historic influence in Dalmatia", or something like that. Noone is denying the influence of Italian (Venetian) culture in Dalmatia. If we can reach some consesnus on this issue, I'd be happy to assist in greatly expanding the article. (I also hope they might be persuaded to start the Italians in Croatia article, about the significant Istrian national minority.) DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 13:58, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Even if I support the expansion of the article "Dalmatian Italians", I agree with you about the future creation of the articles "Italians in Croatia" and "Italian Culture in Dalmatia", in which we can share friendly cooperation (hopefully in the "spirit" of the European Union). Regards--Brunodam 02:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Expand 3. We are here to decide about the possible deletion of "Dalmatian Italians", not about an "infinite" discussion to define if Dalmatia is Croat or Italian. So, my decision is to support - with Giovanni Giove - to maintain and expand the article "Dalmatian Italians".


 * I support even the creation of the articles "Italians in Croatia" and "Italian culture in Dalmatia", that are related to a nation (Croatia) that has a huge part of the Dalmatian coast, but not all.


 * I want to remember that Dalmatia goes geographically from Trieste (Italy) to Scutari (northern Albania) and historically from Istria to the coast of Montenegro. Because of this, actually there are two countries involved with the Dalmatian Italians: Croatia and Montenegro. So, I believe the article must be expanded, with the inclusion of an historical and geographical section if we want to make a good "neutral" and impartial wikipedian article.
 * Finally, allow me to repeat (for the last time, because I have too much work and cannot partecipate in Wikipedia for a while) as Mariokempes wrote: "I say no to deletion... but let's stay neutral!
 * Regards.--Brunodam 02:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete or Rename. Brunodam, we are talking about the modern region of Dalmatia. Moden Dalmatia does not span from Trieste (although it does encompass the Bay of Kotor and the Montenegrin coastline), and it does not include Istria or Rijeka (Fiume). In Roman times Dalmatia was pretty much the size of ex-Yugoslavia, in medieval times it was just a narrow strip of coastline, now it is southern Croatia and (parts of) littoral Montenegro. Italians no longer constitute a national minority in this area. In other words, there are no more Dalmatian Italians, the Yugoslav era (and Italian participation in WW2) unfortunately erased them.
 * I will repeat my proposal: would you consider adding the word "historic" into the name of the article? DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 13:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, DIREKTOR, but I disagree with your there are no more Dalmatian Italians. Even if only a few hundreds, they are represented by the 'Comunita Italiane in Croazia'. Rina Villani (president of the 'Comunita Italiana di Zara') has been recently elected in the 'Zupanija' of Zara/Zadar as you can read in their magazine "Il Dalmata" here . By the way, in the same first page there it is the interesting article "Rivoluzionare la nostra Storia". Of course (but you probably know about) there it is the website of the Spalato section of the Comunita Italiane here . Finally, let's start soon writing on the article "Dalmatian Italians". Later, we can start the article on 'Italian Culture in Croatia' (or Dalmatia) with the addition of the word "historic" on it, if you like.Regards--Brunodam 02:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Italians in Dalmatia are a historic (and present, in Trieste and those 30000 in Istria) ethnic group of obviouus encyclopedic noteworthiness (relative to Dalmatia, republic of Ragusa, Italia irredenta, Istrian exodus, and more).--Victor falk 14:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Trieste and Istria are NOT part of Dalmatia. Look it up. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 16:37, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand for reasons I stated above (in case my vote was not clear). Whether to call the group "historic" is in itself a subject for the article- no need to put it in the title. Mariokempes 16:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete or Rename 2. Italians simply are not present in Dalmatia as a national minority (Istria is NOT Dalmatia). Wether or not the group is historic (i.e. in existance) cannot be considered less important, since the current name is very misleading in a way that it creates the illusion of a national minority within the region (as appears to have been Giovanni Giove's intent). The historic and cultural presence of Italians in Dalmatia is a noteworthy subject, no doubt, but such an article must be named appropriately. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 16:37, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Direktor, I'm not concerned about GG's intent. That is not the issue, and if we can keep neutral in the article that aspect will be mitigated. The question is NOT one of "national minority" or "historic presence" either. It has become obvious to me these are ALL aspects that need to be reflected on and covered in the article. What I have learned from these comments is that "Italian Dalmatians" exist- whether in reality or in a collective memory (it really doesn't matter). This makes the topic worthy of an encyclopedic article. You yourself say "historic and cultural presence of Italians in Dalmatia is a noteworthy subject" and that even though "there are no more Dalmatian Italians", I infer you are a Dalmatian with some Italian roots. Finally, there are thousands of living Italians that consider themselves Dalmatian, even if they no longer live there. Like I said before, many have Croatian surnames but they still consider themselves to be Italian (and are full Italian citizens). Beyond a shadow of a doubt this article is a keeper! Mariokempes 17:14, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand . Mariokempes, I agree with you. Only in Rome there it is a suburb called "Quartiere Dalmato" where many Dalmatian Italians went to live after their exodus from Zara and Dalmatia. Even today there are in this Quartiere nearly 2000 of them, born in Dalmatia before 1945 and still living. And they are closely related to the 300 Dalmatian Italians still living in coastal Croatia today. Only in Zara there are nearly one hundred! Please, see the photo of a group of them here, on Pag 7 of the "Il Dalmata" of March-April 2007, while they celebrate at the Italian Consulate in Spalato/Split. As you can see, Dalmatian Italians still exist. Regards --Brunodam 02:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not concerned with GG's intent either (I just mentioned it by the way), and believe me, I am thinking in a neutral way. This matter is far more important to me than anything Giove might have done. Anyway, I think there may be the problem with your reasoning. While we basically agree on the facts we do not draw the same conclusions. Please explain what you deem is wrong with this train of thought.
 * PRESENT: There are no more Dalmatian Italians.
 * HISTORY: Italian cultural and historic presence is noteworthy. So much so that today there are Itlaians who consider themselves Dalmatians. This must be viewed as a reprecussion of the historic events in an article that explains them. Not as a modern cultural and ethnic phenomenon. The modern Italians of Dalmatian ancestry are not an ethnic group (with its specific culture).
 * In short, this article will not be on modern Dalmatian Italians as an ethnic and cultural phenomenon, since it sadly does not exist. It will undoubtably end up an article about Italian cultural and historic presence in Dalmatia (as well as its modern-day reprecussions, such as Italians of Dalmatian ancestry), since that exists. The name of the article should reflect this, anything else would be misleading and would not be the most accurate name for the content we will include. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 13:39, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Direktor, I will not be pulled into taking sides based on your reasoning because I feel it is "just one side of the coin". That is the beauty of Wikipedia- all valid viewpoints can be included. By deleting the article, the "other side" is shut out. There will no doubt be neutral editors (of which I consider myself one) to make sure a balanced representation is maintained in an expanded article. On thing I must respond to however, you say " There are no more Dalmatian Italians". Not true. They may be few, but they are still there. There were many, many more less than 50 years ago. Also, you yourself admit you are "living proof" of their existence. The fact that the Italian cultural and historic presence is noteworthy and there are still today Italians who consider themselves Dalmatians is a unique modern cultural and ethnic phenomenon that merits further mention in an expanded article. Unfortunately, as long as the article remains a "one liner" (with limited, biased links) it will have little value... START EXPANDING! Mariokempes 17:41, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand you value your neutrality, but unconditional neutrality and total egaliatrianism are absurd. And I AM NOT biased here in any way, but am following logical reasoning. Dalmatian Italians (unfortunately) no longer exist as a specific cultural and ethnic group. These are Italians with Dalmatian ancestry that no longer differ from their current local culture (they are not recognised as a seperate ethnicity by the UN, look it up, FFS!). The only aspect of Dalmatian Italians that we can possibly include is the historic cultural impact on the region. This is what the article will inevitably be about, and it is required that we give it the name that explains its contens in the very best way. In other words, the title "Dalmatian Italians" is a much wider category than the text will cover.  DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 17:56, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

DIREKTOR, allow me to remember that in our western contemporary society 300 persons have the same rights of 300000 people: since the Dalmatian Italians EXIST, they have the right to be taken in consideration for a wikipedia article on them. The problem that you are creating around the name ethnic group has nothing to do with the approval or denial of the article "Dalmatian Italians", since they are ethnic Italians, like the Lombard Italians or the Neapolitan Italians. The UN does not recognize a specific ethnic group called "Toscan Italians" or "Romagnan Italians", so what is the problem here? Anyway, here it is my answer to your questions:

PRESENT: there are 300 Dalmatian Italians in Croatia and 500 in Montenegro. You can see a group of them (members of an Italian Choral of Zara) in the photo on pag. 7 of Il Dalmata of March-April 2007.

HISTORY: OK. Let's start an additional article about Italian cultural and historic presence in dalmatian Croatia.

I hope this long long long discussion will end soon. Regards--Brunodam 18:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Here's your problem, Brunodam: The article can be about three things.
 * 1) A historic event (cultural impact, presence, etc...), wich exists, but such an article should be named accordingly and without sugesting anything else, to make Wiki as useful as possible.
 * 2) A national minority. (there is none)
 * 3) An ethnic group. (there is none)


 * While I heartily support the European Union and its values, the existance of an entire seperate enthnicity (and culture) will require more than that reference to confirm (take a look at the Istro-Romanians, for example). You are right, the number does not matter, but cultural distinctiveness does. As things stand, Dalamtian Italians are neither a seperate ethnic group nor a national minority (there are 30,000 Italians in Croatia, but they live in Istria and Rijeka, or Fiume as you call it). Basically your 300 people are probably migrants, and are in any case not an ethnic group. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 22:59, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

DIREKTOR, I have too much work again, but anyway I want to write you my last message on this topic. You write that 300 Dalmatian Italians are "probably migrants", but this is a mistake. They are a community made mainly by "survivers" of the exodus after WWII. May be you did not read well the articles on Il Dalmata of March-April 2007. Just click on the blue marzo-aprile 2007 issue to see the photo of the members of the Italian Choral of Zara. Anyway here it is a small list of living and renowned "Dalmatian Italians": According to declarations done by Rina Villani there are now more than one hundred of them only in Zara/Zadar and they call themselves Dalmatian Italians in their reunions. It is clear to everybody that they exist, so why don't allow an article with their name???? ......It starts to seem illogical to me all this refusal (unless it is centered on nationalistic issues, that should be out of Wikipedia).......Anyway, I believe it is time for an Admin to decide against or in favor (looking at the opinions of the wikipedians in this talkpage) and I totally agree with Giovanni Giove, Mariokempes, Viktor falk and some others to KEEP AND EXPAND the article 'Dalmatian Italians'.Regards.--Brunodam 01:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Rina Villani, president of the Comunita italiana of Zara
 * Adriana Grubelić
 * Simone Filippo Stratico
 * Tullio Crali
 * Ottavio Missoni
 * Renzo de'Vidovich
 * Giuseppe Lallich
 * Emilio Marin
 * Secondo Raggi
 * Franco Ziliotto
 * Waldese Coen
 * Bruno Cervenca
 * Franco Luxardo
 * Giovanni Francesco Fortunio
 * Francesco Rismondo
 * Girolamo Luxardo


 * Brunodam, what is this? These people on the list are descendents of some Dalmatian citizens from the past. A half of these surnames are typical Croatian surnames: Grubelić, Kralj, Vidović, Lalić, Marin, Crvenica. Stratiko was a Greek family which came to Dalmatia from Crete in 17th century. They were both Slavized and Italianized. These people should be called "Italian Croats" and not "Dalmatian Italians", if using the same logic! Something is absolutely wrong with your Italian POV kind of thinking. Falsificating of Dalmatian history, people and culture this way will not work, believe me. Zenanarh 14:09, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I took these names from the italian wikipedia (article:Dalmazia). Anyway even we Italians can say that Marin -as an example- is a "croatization" of the italian name Marini (from marinai=sailors).......We Italians consider "Italians" even people with not typical italian names, like Cavour (a french name) and no serious scholar has ever accused us of "falsification" of French history for this (count Cavour, the clever creator of Italian unity, was a descendant of a noble French family) ......Now there it is even an article, in the italian wikipedia, named "Dalmati Italiani".Regards. --Brunodam 15:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Marin doesn't come from Marini. Chakavian Croatian format of the Hebrew name Maria is Mare. If you are (engl.) "the son of Mare" then you are (cro.) "Marin sin" - in short: Marin. Many Croatian surnames in Dalmatia were developed in the same way: Milin (the son of Mile), Mikin (the son of Mika), Dorkin, Pajkin, Pavlin, Antišin, Dragin,... These surnames are specific Croatian surnames from a few villages in the islands of the Zadar district. Zenanarh 08:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * So, we deal with "Croats who think to be Italians" (BTW your analysis about the names is no so correct as you can think). --Giovanni Giove 14:48, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Dear ignorant, in this case we are dealing with Croats who have Italian passport and live in Italy in the moment, but obviously they are conscious of their Dalmatian (Croatian) ancestry. These people are only some individuals, immigrants to Italy from these Croatian families. What do you know about Dalmatian surnames? Names? Anything?


 * You people still don't get it, do you? I'm a Dalmatian, DIREKTOR is a Dalmatian, Kubura is a Dalmatian. You are arguing with Dalmatians about Dalmatia! Almost all of your statements are based on wrong information. Brunodam previously wrote that there is a lack of original documents, which is a great joke, since Dalmatian cities have really rich archives of original documents, especially Zadar and Dubrovnik. The point is that Italian historiography didn't use references based on the original documents, so we have fight now over almost every Dalmatia related article in Wiki. True is that there is a lack of Italians in the original documents. Zenanarh 08:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It is not allowed to vote this subject. The existence of the present article can not be discussed. Italians in Dalmatia were a matter of fact for centuries, and the *opinon* of few Croatian users that claim they were "Croats who thought to be Italians" can not deny this fact. Italians in Dalmatia still exist, even if reduced to a very small community. There are sourced evidences in the article. For these reasons the article shall be mantained and expanded, regardless to the result of the present votation. The Croatian users may insert their own POV in the expanded article.--Giovanni Giove 13:56, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Take it easy Giovanni, I am not advocating unconditional deletion. I just think the name should be changed a little, that's all. To put it theatrically, I am living proof of the historic and cultuaral presence of Italians in Dalmatia. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 14:01, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The article shall be mantained with the same title, regardless the result of votation. There are an amount of Dalmatians self-declearing Italians; that shall be enough. The opinion of few Croatians user (I do not mean DIREKTOR), who talk about "Croats who think to be Italians", has no value. On the contrary I could organize a group to vote for the claim that ... Croats are "Serbs that think to be Croats". Would you like the idea?! --Giovanni Giove 14:48, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete or modify per arguments by Kubura & Direktor. --Dr.Gonzo 19:31, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy close per the nominator's (DIREKTOR) reasoning above. To quote, 'I am not advocating unconditional deletion. I just think the name should be changed a little, that's all'. AfD is not a place to resolve disputes. Nuttah68 20:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep & Expand 2: A "speedy close" would be nice; however, Italian Dalmatians do definitely exist so a name change to suggest an historic only role would be misleading. This is NOT "about a fictitious entity"... as was originally posted by the nominator. There are still self-described Italians living in Dalmatia today... and many thousands more which consider themselves "displaced" Dalmatian Italians living in Italy and abroad (see for a simple example). Contrary to what Direktor, GG and others may suggest- I don't see this article as one about a unique "ethnic" group. There is obviously much more to it and let me reiterate... "Italian Dalmatians" exist- whether in reality or in a collective memory (and again, it really doesn't matter- hopefully an expanded article will elaborate on this aspect).  Mariokempes 23:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.