Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Italian colonization of the Americas


 * 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 procedural close. AfD from 2004 that somehow got lost and was never properly closed. Non-admin closure. Safiel (talk) 01:35, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Italian colonization of the Americas
Italy did not ever have any American colonies. No article needed. Rmhermen 01:11, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. See above... P Ingerson 01:50, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. To quote the article: "Italy did not play a part in the colonization of the Americas." Enough said. --MarkSweep 07:10, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. A poor excuse for an article, that doesn't even mention the island of Santo Prosciutto in the Italian West Indies. JamesMLane 07:42, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Bad title, but I can imagine a perfectly good article on Italian role in the colonization of the Americas. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:15, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep: Same thing I said in the Irish one, its not even a day old. It is better having this small piece then the void which was there before. As I said on creation of it someone who knows about such things should wright about Italian Americans. To Mark (also applies to the Irish one)- the title is Italian colonization which is meaning Italians not Italy the country. --Josquius 19:27, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * We should indeed have an article on Italian-Americans -- and we do. People from Italy moving to another country's colony or to an independent country doesn't constitute Italian colonization. JamesMLane 19:52, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * The topic is valid enough to be expanded upon, perhaps as part of Immigration to the United States of America or a link therefrom, but the title is horrible. Colonization is commonly understood to mean conquest by a state. Immigration is the proper phraseology, if I'm understanding your intent correctly.  Delete, then start again with a better title and more information. Katefan0 19:59, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Excuse me, "to the United States"? The country in which the Italians had the most impact is Argentina. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:43, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Excuse ME, but I think the spirit of my comment was clear. Take the U.S. as one example. And feel free to apply this to the other spot where you took offense.  Katefan0 22:55, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - no Italian colonies in the Americas, title makes no sense. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 01:07, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, nonexistent. The word colonization has a meaning. Gazpacho 02:20, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, but rename into something less strange. Italian immigration into the Americas? History of Italian people in the USA? Mikkalai 08:53, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * If you didn't want this article why was is was it on the list? I simply saw it as a evil red link whilst reading another article in the group and went and made the stub to draw attention to it. For colonization vs. immigration. The Italians colonized the USA and Argentina due to the large numbers in which they went there establishing little Italys. Colonization is immigration en mass creating new communities which many people going to the Americas did --Josquius 17:51, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Thats not what colonization is. the italians had no colonies in the americas, nor did italy clame any settelments as their own "aka colonies" Fledgeling 05:13, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * That is what colonization is. Take leper colonies, they aren't created by a country called Leperland were they? And when insects colonise a new area they aren't doing it as part of some grand insectoid world domination scheme, they are doing it for themselves. What you are speaking of is imperialism, the creation of colonies as part of a greater empire. Looking at the wikipedia article I see how you've got it wrong, that has it totally wrong. --Josquius 12:36, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: Josquius is right that the dictionary definition of colonization can mean when any homogeneous group of people move en masse to a place and settle. But I don't think that's commonly understood enough to use this way in this context.  People commonly equate colonization with claims by a state and so I don't think it's really a proper usage. Katefan0 14:50, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)


 * and i forgot Strong Delete - 05:16, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. See above. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 02:37, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep. See below. --Mononoke 21:20, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is no need to have articles about things that did not happen. Martg76 00:21, 16 Dec 2004 (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.