Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Venetian people (2nd nomination)


 * 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 delete and redirect to Venetian.  Sandstein  06:00, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Venetian people
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is no ethnic group called 'Venetians,' they are simply Italians. Serafart (talk) 19:52, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. This seems to be a mishmash of Adriatic Veneti and people from the city of Venice, who don't belong in the same article. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:08, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:32, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:32, 31 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Republic of Venice Venetian (disambig) (updated -- see note below), once home to a Venetian people. As this is unsourced and functionally redundant to that article, there's no sense keeping it, though. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 04:47, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. An ethnic group or ethnicity is a category of people who identify with each other based on common language, ancestral, social, cultural, or national experiences. Reading Venetian nationalism, I found many points supporting the thesis of a modern Veneti ethnicity (starting after 1900, I would say). I agree that the introduction is more to the Adriatic Veneti. I don't agree that Venetian refers only to the people from Venice: Venetian is also used to identify historical to the large dominion of the Republic of Venice. Anyway, at most that would open a talk about renaming the article to Veneti people. Many Veneti consider Veneto to be a nation distinct from Italy and often refuse the validity of the result of the referendum with which Veneto was united with Italy in 1866. There must be something worth to trouble the Italian institutions to a harsh reaction after a informal referendum in 2014: Franco Rocchetta, former member of the Parliament, founder of Liga Veneta, was arrested, alleged to be a terrorist. He was later released from prison, but the message was clear. His fault ? endorsement of the Plebiscito.eu committee. Many Italians seem to feel a diversity from the Veneti, despising them by the insult polentone (Polenta eater), and accusing them of thinking only to work, with zero culture (today, the insult is extended by originating from south to all northerners, but it originated toward the Veneti). A culture of hard work, as opposed to that of the bella vita (good life), seems to cut across two different cultures. --Robertiki (talk) 09:50, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You've utterly failed to address anything relevant to a deletion discussion, which is where, by whom, and how extensively is this subject documented? This discussion is not about your or anyone else's opinions of politics and history.  It's about what is reliably and independently documented.  So far, we have the article's creator (also a major contributor to the deleted article, who can be found  saying that this thesis is not supported by any published histories because the whole world has completely "censored" it) citing xyrself in the re-created article (third citation, on a self-publishing WWW site) and you citing things about a Venetian language not a people.  The challenge that this is an unsupported, undocumented, unreviewed synthesis, in violation of our no original research policy, has been put forward time and again: on the article's talk page in 2009, in a prior AFD discussion, and even at Deletion Review.  Once again: Where are the sources for this subject, as synthesized and as claimed by this article's and the supporting self-published source's author not to have been documented by anyone?  Sources!  Sources!  Sources!  Uncle G (talk) 12:02, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Well let's be clear about something: "Venetians"/"Venetian people" is most definitely a real subject. It's not just a language. It's part of Italy now, but Venetians are from the Republic of Venice, which we have an article about as well as History of the Republic of Venice. It was an independent city-state for centuries. If you're wanting for sources about "venetian people", a quick google book search turned up a whole lot. The problem isn't that this isn't a notable subject -- it's that this article seems confused (or at least confusing) in the way it combines people of the region, people of the historic region, and speakers of the language into one group. I don't know how much the terms are used in which ways these days, but I can see that this article doesn't offer readers anything beyond what is already covered at the Republic of Venice and other articles on the subject. Therefore redirect. I do believe that someone could recreate this article down the road and it would be acceptable, though. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 14:07, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * To Uncle G. Where ? People unhappy with taxes would automatically want to seceed ? No. Only if there is a underlying identity. So news like this and this looks to me as relevant. More about identity and more. Per definition there is a identity in play to collectively act against a centralized power. Also UN gives space. Only the language, but a first established piece of the identity. Whom ? Explain what you are asking for, please. How extensively ? Not very much, I would say. Perhaps it's a too pacific people, makes no news, perhaps you would say: lukewarm about their identity ? About the creator, please, split the replies, don't pull me on his wording. You are right that sources are missing. But it is no reason to cold suppress, without giving time to searching (I agree that the creator should have done a first job). If a common language, a cultural identity and a cultural memory (in Brazil, Mexico, United States) are not enough to warrant a waiting phase, then let us wait a "recreate" of this article in an acceptable way. --Robertiki (talk) 15:31, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:CONTENTFORK. The article is just an incoherent mess and as said by User:Rhododendrites above it "doesn't offer readers anything beyond what is already covered at the Republic of Venice and other articles on the subject". I disagree with the redirect suggestion as the term is too ambiguous to be redirected somewhere (Adriatic Veneti, Venice, Veneto,  Republic of Venice and a few others seem all relevant). Cavarrone  19:06, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually that's a good point that it's ambiguous. I've updated my redirect target to point to Venetian, a disambiguation page which includes "historical inhabitants of the Republic of Venice" and can include any of those. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 19:12, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I would not oppose such a redirect. Cavarrone 21:54, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Neither me. Until I find the time or some one else makes the article more coherent. --Robertiki (talk) 23:45, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete instead altogether as there's nothing at all for its own actual article and the disambiguation listed has nothing for "Venetian people", only instead for other subjects. Anyone needing Venice would search that as is, SwisterTwister   talk  07:14, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * ? How is "Historical inhabitants of the Republic of Venice" disambiguated from "Venetians" not synonymous with "Venetian people"? If a Venetian is an inhabitant of a place, then a group of them would be Venetian people. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 13:33, 6 June 2016 (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.