Talk:Silvius Magnago

Meran/-o

Tha article states at the moment: Magnago was born in Meran. Various IPs try to change that into Merano. I find that inapposite for the following reasons:

• When Magnago was born, Meran was still part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. At those times, Meran had only one single official name, and that was Meran. Merano was only introduced with the Regio decreto nr. 800 in 1923. Therefore, writing Merano in an 1914-context is an anachronism. Immanuel Kant's birthplace was Königsberg, Umberto D'Ancona's was Fiume, and so on: It seems to be good Wikipedia practice to avoid anachronisms.
• Both Meran and Merano are used in English language. Per WP:NOTBROKEN there is no need for exchanging one name with another.
• An IP also stated as an additional justification that Bolzano and Merano populations are made mainly of native Italian speakers... That is simply wrong and shows that the user behind the IPs has little or no knowledge about the subject. In fact, Merano has a German speaking majority. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 11:51, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

I quote from Talk:Merano:

• "Wikipedia naming convention states to use the most common name in English which is in fact Merano"
• "Bozen and Meran are most commonly called Bolzano and Merano in modern English, so we use those"
• "What the English speakers do is of course more relevant for the English language Wikipedia, so Merano is the correct solution"

I quote from Talk:Bolzano:

• "Bolzano is the Italian name, Bozen is the German name, Bolzano is the English name; English wikipedia => English name"
• "While I am more than happy to call the city Bozen myself, for the English Wikipedia Bolzano is the proper name based on common usage and naming conventions"
• "All English language encyclopedia's will refer to Bolzano and all other cities that were formerly German by the name the country they are now part of calls them"

There isn't a single line where it was established that Merano/Bolzano must be called Meran/Bozen before 1923. It's just your personal, subjective opinion. If you think your opinion is correct, then create a new topic in Talk:Merano and Talk:Bolzano asking to change the consensus. If you succeed in persuading admins that the consensus needs to be changed, then you're free to edit these articles in that way, but now you're just going against consensus.
In order to reply what you wrote here:

• At those times, Meran had only one single official name, and that was Meran. Merano was only introduced with the Regio decreto nr. 800 in 1923 are you serious? You instst with this argument, and I keep answering: Italy was officially created in 1981, before it's always been just a clusted of statelets, some of them dominated by Austrians, French, Spanish, etc.... Are you saying that, wherever there's an Italian town name in an article about a previous period than 1981, we should use the name used in that period (Latin, ancient Italian, local dialect, foreign conqueror's language...)? Again: are you serious? Or just incoherent because this is all right just for Merano and Bolzano, or even just for those 2 articles? Please...
• Both Meran and Merano are used in English language > "Wikipedia naming convention states to use the most common name in English which is in fact Merano" + "Bozen and Meran are most commonly called Bolzano and Merano in modern English, so we use those" = "What the English speakers do is of course more relevant for the English language Wikipedia, so Merano is the correct solution"
• there is no need for exchanging one name with another so why do you keep exchanging ona name with another?

And about your last point: you're right. In Merano Italian speakers are "just" 49,26%, while the "German speaking majority" (sic!) is even 50,27! Crushing. Really. Well, until 1961 Italian speakers were 58,6%... Why don't we change all these town names in the encyclopedia renaming them all "Merano" from 1923 and 1961 and "Meran" before 1923 and after 1961? Not silly at all, not at all... Well, the consensus is Merano, not Meran, even if there's 1,01% of German speakers more than Italian speakers. Period. Again, and I hope for the last time: you're free to go on the talk page and ask for a change. Just a piece of news: the last one who asked for that change, the IP 131.159.0.47 from "Monaco di Baviera" (^^), is still waiting for someone to become aware of his topic after 1 year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.20.2.95 (talk) 19:33, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

One more word, my Italian friend, and I'll erase every single Fiume I'll find on en.wikipedia ;-) No, sorry, just kidding, I won't, I'm not like you.

Regarding the stuff from the talk pages: Sorry, not interested. You say There isn't a single line where it was established that Merano/Bolzano must be called Meran/Bozen before 1923. I answer: There isn't a single line where it was established that Merano/Bolzano must be called Merano/Bolzano before 1923. In fact, nobody says anywhere anything about that question. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

Yes, I'm serious. And I can easily show you dozens of cases, where Wikipedia avoids anachronistic usage. Immanuel Kant's was born in Königsberg, Umberto D'Ancona's was born in Fiume, Constantine XI Palaiologos was born in Constantinople, etc. etc. Are you going to change all these articles, too?

so why do you keep exchanging ona name with another? I'm simply reverting your totally useless contributions. The article Silvius Magnago needs expansion, high quality sources, users with knowledge and linguistic skills. The article certainly doesn't need linguistic cleansing, just because you don't want to be bothered by the name Meran. There is even a special policy, that strongly encourages users not to annoy authors with useless changes. It's called WP:NOTBROKEN. Mettiti il cuore in pace, there is nothing wrong with using Meran.

About your last point: That is not comparable. The town has two names since World War II, so both of them could be used for that period. Before 1923 it had just one name. That doesn't mean, that Merano could not be used anywhere in pre-1923-contexts (maybe there are cases, where it is justified), but there is certainly no reason to erase the German name everwhere. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 20:06, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

I've removed your personal attacks (my "nationalist cleansing", "stubborness", "time wasting", etc).

Just because I removed your abusive comments earlier? I inserted my remarks again,without "nationalist" and "stubborn", but "time wasting" is certainly not a personal attack. The next time I see you removing harmless comments I will go and get a semi-protection of this talk page, too... --Mai-Sachme (talk) 17:09, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Also the reference to your language center for I had to repeat the same concept isn't a personal attack, at least as my "time wasting" for fusses instead of useful activities...

Sorry, but that's not, how it works. Dear user behind the IPs, why don't you stop with your behaviour? First you changed the sentence with Magnago's birthplace into:

• Magnago was born in Merano, which was then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and named Meran. Sorry, but that implicates to the readers that the town was named Meran only under Austrian rule. That is factually wrong. Meran was the town's official name in 1914 as it is still today. Then you chose the following version:
• Magnago was born in Meran (today Merano)... Again, this implicates to the readers, that the town isn't called Meran anymore. And, again, that is factually wrong.

Come on, what is going on here? What's all this fuss about? Wouldn't you prefer to spend your time for more useful activities? --Mai-Sachme (talk) 19:58, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

All right. Then let's switch back to the original solution: Merano. Period. Since you are rejecting any attempt of compromise to use both names. So we'll use just the first one, the more correct, the consensus name. If that's what you prefer, no problem.

The "original solution" was Meran/Merano, but you didn't like that either :-) --Mai-Sachme (talk) 09:57, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

The original solution found by my friend and respectful of en.wikipedian consensus, which you keep ignoring, was Merano/Meran. Correct because Merano is the most used name in English. Correct because the main article is Merano while Meran is just a redirrect. Correct because in the main article I read "Merano or Meran" not "Meran or Merano". That's why the Merano/Meran solution would have been the best one. But you didn't even accept your very "original solution", Meran/Merano, you had to remove the absolutely correct name Merano. It's you the one who doesn't make compromise and acts against consensus. It's just true. Oh, it's obvious that this behaviour of yours doesn't make you a nationalist, nor an extremist, absolutely not at all, I want this opinion of mine to be clear enough.

No, the original solution was Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano, as everyone can see. After noticing your heroic "improvements" ([1], [2]), I tried to avoid anachronisms and find a line of compromise, by changing one town name to the German (and at those times only official) version and the other town name to the Italian version, but all in vain... --Mai-Sachme (talk) 13:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Don't pretend you don't understand. Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano was the very first article text, the solution found by my friend to respect the consensus was using first Merano-Bolzano and then Meran-Bozen. It wasn't like your "final solution" (pardon... Freudian lapsus) which consisted in totally removing the Italian name Merano refusing every compromise attempt such as "Meran (today Merano)" and "Merano, which was then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and named Meran". Deny it. Come on. Show me some more mirror-free-climbing.

No wonder I removed that, your "solution" implied a factual wrong statement, namely that Meran isn't called Meran anymore. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 17:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

My solution which implied to use both Merano and Meran (Merano/Meran)? Quite strange statement...

I like Meran/Merano. Here in Switzerland we have an analogous case for Biel/Bienne, an originally German speaking town which became bilingual due to the massive immigration of French-speaking workers in the clock industry from the Bernese Jura. Alex2006 (talk) 13:52, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

But the page you're talking about is Biel/Bienne. Whilst the page we're talking about is Merano not Meran/Merano. Biel redirects to Biel/Bienne; Bienne redirects to Biel/Bienne: that's the consensus reached in Talk:Biel/Bienne. Meran redirects to Merano, that's the consensus reached in Talk:Merano. As I've repeated you're all free to go to Merano talk page and make your proposal for a consensus change.

Uffa...

• One more word, my Italian friend...

You're free to do it. I'll revert you. Because I'm not like you. I'm not ereasing every single Meran I'll find on en.wikipedia. Just reverting your wrong edits. The one who did that was the other IP, which isn't me. Anche se non mi credi.

• Regarding the stuff from...

What's the problem with your language center? In the talk pages is clearly said that the forms "Merano" and "Bolzano" must be used. You say that it's not true before 1923. Nowhere is written such a thing. There's no need for a line where it's established that "Merano" and "Bolzano" must be called like that before 1923, because it was already been said that "Merano" and "Bolzano" must be called like that, period. Ti faccio un disegnino?

• Yes, I'm serious...

Oh my God... I quote from Königsberg: "This article is about the city before 1945. For after 1945, see Kaliningrad". I quote from Kaliningrad: "This article is about the city since 1945. For detailed history before 1945, see Königsberg". No comment. You've just given me one more reason to believe I'm right. If you want to use your personal criterion of naming South Tyrol towns, then create a Meran page about the town before 1923 (and maybe after 1961). Otherwise, the consensus is to call it Merano, period. Tu avere capito buono sì?

• I'm simply reverting your totally useless...

Why would my contributions be useless and yours useful? If there's no need to change a name, then why do you keep changing it? And you know that Merano and Bolzano are the standard names in en.wikipedia, so your contributions are not only useless but also less constructive than mine. I'm not even interested in finding every single German name of Italian towns in order to change it, maybe just a few, but what I want is to keep an eye on you. And you know why.

• About your last point...

Again: I'm not ereasing the German name everywhere, just there, you know, it seems to be so important to you, at least as important as asking an admin to block my previous IP which had never ever had anything to do with you before that one single edit... Now: Merano is the most used name in English, there's a consensus about using Merano instead of Meran, nowhere is written that it must be used Meran before 1923, and everybody is free to ask to change this convention. The way you act is the wrong one. You do exactly what I do, the difference is that I do it towards the preferred form so nobody can contest it. There's no way you're being right in this, da qualunque parte rigiri la frittata, main froint.~

Dear user behind the plethora of IPs: It's very simple. Please show me a piece of policy or guideline, which states, that it is forbidden to use Meran in a 1914-context. If you can't show me anything like that, the discussion is closed. You failed to make any useful contribution here. What follows, is a complete list of your edits:

• 1st edit: useless change from German-Italian town names to Italian-German town names
• 2nd edit: useless change from German-Italian town names to Italian-German town names
• 3rd edit: exchange of a German name with an Italian name (and that is an anachronism, as I explained on the talk page)
• 4th edit: exchange of a German name with an Italian name
• 5th edit: exchange of a German name with an Italian name
• 6th edit: exchange of a German name with an Italian name
• 7th edit: jumbling the German and Italian town names introducing a factually wrong implication (as I explained on the talk page)
• 8th edit: jumbling the German and Italian town names introducing a factually wrong implication

It's difficult for me to understand, what your goal is. But whatever it might be, please stop it now. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 09:57, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Oh my God! If you're an intelligent person in full possession of his mental faculties (and I have no doubts you are) why are you making me repeat the same things every time you reply? Now follow this reasoning, step by step:

• In Talk:Merano it's said: "Wikipedia naming convention states to use the most common name in English which is in fact Merano" "Bozen and Meran are most commonly called Bolzano and Merano in modern English, so we use those" "What the English speakers do is of course more relevant for the English language Wikipedia, so Merano is the correct solution". It's all right so far? Have you understood that these sentences are taken from there? Do you want to control by yourself I'm saying the truth? Well. Next step...
• The meaning of those sentences is that the name Merano must be preferred to Meran in this English encyclopedia. Do you agree with that? I don't mean wether you agree with the sentences or not, but wether you agree that the meaning of the senences is that or not. So, do you agree? If you do, it means that: you agree it's correct to use Merano instead of Meran (even if not always strongly necessary) while it's uncorrect or at least very inadvisable to change the name Merano to Meran; and that this conventions is valid "always". A-L-W-A-Y-S. Because, if this convention wasn't always valid, we should have read something like "Merano is the correct name to use in an English Wiki BUT not before 1923" or "EXCEPT for the 1914-period" or "ONLY after its name (already in use) became the offical name". So, do you agree with that meaning of the sentences is that or not?
• As the meaning of the sentences from the talk page IS that, your changing the name from Merano to Meran, and even removing the correct Merano from the 2 names solution, is wrong. Your behaviour is WRONG. Have you understood that? If you haven't, please restart reading from the beginning until you understand.
• Since I'm not like you, I've always told you that this hasn't to be perforce the only solution: you can go to Talk:Merano and make a proposal, such as creating 2 different pages, Merano and Meran, or to establish that the name Merano can only be used in a post-1945-context, even if this encyclopedia was created for XXI century English-speaking people who mostly know the town as Merano, or to invert the consensus and call the town Meran because there's 1,01% more German speakers than Italian speakers, you're free to do it. But until that moment, until you reach a new consensus, en.wikipedia consensus which you keep ignoring (and I don't know how many times I've said that) establishes that the name used must be Merano. "Merano is the correct solution". Period.

Oh, I see, you can't cite a policy which forbids the usage of Meran in 1914-contexts. Fine. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 17:10, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I see, you can't cite a policy which forbids the usage of Merano in 1914-contexts. Fine.

(id est: te l'ho detto, gira che ti rigira sempre lì s'arriva, non c'è modo che tu possa aver ragione a sostituire Merano con Meran, fine)

I think, you've heard now 3 different users. Your case couldn't convince neither zzuuzz (I take the view that the IP should do something more constructive) nor Alessandro57 (Since here we refer to a time prior to 1919, the name "Meran" is in this case appropriate.) nor me. How many more opinions do you want. 5? 8? 12? --Mai-Sachme (talk) 22:51, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Before dismantling your house of cards, let me ask you a question: why don't you and your admin friends make a consensus change request in Talk:Merano, where it's ESTABLISHED that the name we must use is "Merano" and no Wikipedian's mere opinion can go against such a consensus??? Answer me, please. This is the... 5th? 8th? 12th? I don't remember how many times I've already asked you. Maybe this time I'll be luck and shall receive an answer.

Oh, right, the dismantling... 1st: The IP editor is correct in linking directly to the article rather than via a redirect (ouch!) 2nd: it's your opinion, and I agree: in fact I'm also doing other constructive edits which have nothing to do with South Tyrol, as I've always done (ouch!!) 3rd: Personally I am still for keeping the status-quo, mainly because the German majority is weak, the usage of the two forms is almost 50 - 50 and the two forms practically coincide. Last but not least, this modus vivendi has worked fairly well until now. I know, what I am writing is not very encyclopedic, but in my job area we say "Never touch the running system" :-), and I think that the price that we should pay for this move would be an increase in edit warring. Cheers (ouch!!!) i.e.: so far, just one (1) person has agreed with your behaviour, and not in general but just regarding this single edit of yours. Unluckily, normally cases like this are dealt in a different way in this Wiki: born in Fiume (today Rijeka)/Born in Rijeka (back then still named Fiume and part of the Kingdom of Italy) (thanks for the hint) (by the way, what about my last quotes, that is "This article is about the city before 1945. For after 1945, see Kaliningrad" and "This article is about the city since 1945. For detailed history before 1945, see Königsberg"? I bet ignoring them and shifting attention to "language center" jokes is the best solution when you have no way to reply, isn't it?)!

Mhm, and since I've been dismantling myself, a semi-protection of the page has come into affect, in order to stop your edit warring with a plethora of IPs... The difference between Fiume and Meran is, that Fiume isn't called Fiume anymore, while Meran is still one of the town's official names. The wording Born in Merano (back then still named Meran and part of Austria-Hungary) would imply to readers, that the town isn't called Meran anymore, which is factually wrong. Still no policy in sight which forbids the usage of Meran in 1914-contexts? --Mai-Sachme (talk) 13:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Still no policy in sight which forbids the usage of Merano in 1914-contexts?

(id est: te l'ho detto, gira che ti rigira sempre lì s'arriva, non c'è modo che tu possa aver ragione a sostituire Merano con Meran, fine)

No, certainly not. Neither Meran nor Merano are forbidden. The current text says Meran. I find that reasonable in an 1914-context, Alex finds that reasonable in an 1914-context, you're the only one here, who doesn't find that reasonable. Since you can't cite any policy giving weight to your argumentation, that means, that you don't have a mandate to change the article text unilaterally. Case closed. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 16:41, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Why can't you say just once something fully true? Why must you always either tell lies or half truths? Why do you keep using the "2 weights-2 measures" method? You find that reasonable in a 1914-context, Alex finds "Meran/Merano" reasonable in a 1914-context, WCM found the direct link (Merano) reasonable in a 1914-context. So far you continued repeating that there's no policy which forbids the usage of "Meran" in 1914-context, while I told you that there's no policy which forbids the usage of "Merano" in 1914-context, because I don't want necessarily to delete the name "Meran", just inserting "Merano" and link it instead of the other one. It's you refusing one of the names, not me. And that obviously isn't far likely to a nationalist behaviour. You removed today pieces of my messages but, when I dared to do the same to you, you threatened me. You link only those pieces of revisions giving you reason, ignoring that all my following answer, so that the one who watches your links can have just a partial opinion of facts, without the chance to listen to the other side. I've always invited you to make a proposal in Merano talk page, but you didn't answer even once. Instead, you asked for a 3rd opinion. Well, my friend's opinion is one opinion. I'll tell him to come when he has time. He'll be happy of that, since it was him who made the very first edit. I told you I would keep an eye on you, you've wasted these days after this, but it was your choice.

A little remark from my side:

• For long standing consensus (this is the nth time with n>10 which I observe these silly nationalistic disputes) and according to WP:COMMONNAME, Merano and Bolzano are the names commonly used at enwiki for this two cities in South-Tyrol;
• Since here we refer to a time prior to 1919, the name "Meran" is in this case appropriate.

Alex2006 (talk) 09:26, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

May be unrelated to the current discussion, just as a note: It seems to me , as if Meran has been by far the most common English name of the town. Since 1945 both names are almost equally used, so given the German language majority and by the standards of WP:NBZ the article should probably be moved... --Mai-Sachme (talk) 10:07, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Personally I am still for keeping the status-quo, mainly because the German majority is weak, the usage of the two forms is almost 50 - 50 and the two forms practically coincide. Meran/-o is really a "Grenzfall". :-) Last but not least, this modus vivendi has worked fairly well until now. I know, what I am writing is not very encyclopedic, but in my job area we say "Never touch the running system" :-), and I think that - provided that one can find the necessary consensus (and I strongly doubt it, since all the Italian nationalists would be against it) - the price that we should pay for this move would be an increase in edit warring. Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 10:22, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Third Opinion

A third opinion has been requested. I see lengthy discussion, but, because it is so lengthy, I don't see a concise question. What is the question? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:04, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Thanks for your interest. The article states at the moment: Magnago was born in Meran. Various IPs try to change that into Merano. I find that inapposite for the following reasons:

• When Magnago was born, Meran was still part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. At those times, Meran had only one single official name, and that was Meran. The name Merano was only introduced in 1923. Therefore, writing Merano in an 1914-context is an anachronism. Immanuel Kant's birthplace was Königsberg, Umberto D'Ancona's was Fiume, and so on: It seems to be good Wikipedia practice to avoid anachronisms.
• Nowadays, both Meran and Merano are official and both are used in English language. Per WP:NOTBROKEN there is no need for exchanging one name with another.

Generally, I find the IPs' behaviour tremendously unreasonable, since their one and only interest consists in the naming dispute, brought forward with continued edit warring that made a semi-protection of the page necessary. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 16:14, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

How many editors are involved in this dispute, anyway? I see two named editors and an IP. Is one of the named editors also editing logged out, or is this a dispute between three editors? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

It is mainly a dispute between me and an editor using a plethora of IPs (here you can find a list of some of the involved IPs, here a full list of the IPs' "contribution" to the article). --Mai-Sachme (talk) 16:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: The question is: have we got to use the consensus name (Merano) or the other one (Meran)? My opinion is to use the consensus name, which is the most common in English (this is an English encyclopedia). The user who made the requests is German-speaking and wants to use Meran. He argues that the Italian name mustn't be used because in that year Merano was not yet the official name although already used. I replied that: in Talk:Merano was established to use Merano, not to use Merano only after it became the official name of the town; if we do what he wants, this would mean changing all Italian towns names according to the period they're referred to, because Italy was born in 1861 and before that year the official languages were a lot, from Latin to dialects, from ancient Italian to foreign conquerors' languages; he can make a request for a consensus change in Merano talk page, but he kept ignoring it, saying that there's written nowhere that Meran can't be used for that period, in fact it's just written that Merano must be used in place of Meran, nowhere is written that there's an exception for such period; I proposed to use both names, as it's already being done for other towns in en.wikipedia, but he refused and removed the Italian name which was next to the German name. That's all. Consensus version of the encyclopedia vs. secondary name in the encyclopedia. To answer your last question, the editors are Mai-Sachme and me (my IP always starts with 151.20.0-1-2-3), but the first edit was done by a friend of mine, and if you like I can ask him to come here discussing too.

That's a third opinion. I will be removing the third opinion request. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:40, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Mai-Sachme had moved your comment after noclador's answer so that it looked like you answered him instead of me. This would make you all understand whom you're dealing with. The same person who modifies other people's comments and threatens the author when he dares to do the same with him.

Let me chip in here: I assume I am the only editor actually from Meran/Merano... there is a consensus on wikipedia to use a city's name as it was used when a person was born: hence Rudyard Kipling was born in Bombay, as was Salman Rushdie and Zubin Mehta. Bombay was renamed in 1995 to Mumbai, but the consensus is to keep Bombay for the people born before that. Same goes for Beijing. Sometimes people put (now named xyz) behind the old name. In that context I suggest to stick with Meran for the Magnago article. noclador (talk) 17:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

See born in Fiume (today Rijeka)/Born in Rijeka (back then still named Fiume and part of the Kingdom of Italy) (Mai-Sachme was the one who refused the 2-name solutions, deleting Merano, as you can see here) (yes, Mai-Sachme, you're not the only one able to link differences between revisions).

The original solution was Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano, as everyone can see. After noticing your heroic "improvements" ([3], [4]), I tried to avoid anachronisms and find a line of compromise, by changing one town name to the German (and at those times only official) version and the other town name to the Italian version, but all in vain... For guys like you, Meran is a "wrong name". No need for further comments, just sad... --Mai-Sachme (talk) 23:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

The original text was Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano, against consensus. The first solution has been Merano/Meran and Bolzano/Bozen. About the irony you keep doing about my edits, I could have told you already but I've been waited for the best chance to arrive: you really like being clap-clapped for your great contributions which took you God only knows how long time, you're such an extraordinary contributor, Wiki would be nothing without you, we all should bow down to you! The only thing you've always avoided is finding a line of comprimise: it was you who removed the Italian name, I just put the German one after. I've repeated you about 17 times that the consensus just says to use Merano instead of Meran, without mentioning any exception for your beloved 1914-context, because it's the most used name in English, but all in vain... I've also repeated that thing about Italian town names used in the past to show the paradox of your statement, but all in vain... And, for the 18th time, it's not "for guys like me" but "for Wikipedian CONSENSUNS" that is the wrong name to be used in this encyclopedia, I've tried using them both and you removed the Italian one (as I said yesterday, you're not the only one able to use links). But as I can see below there's no really need for further comments... XXX — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.20.3.141 (talk • contribs) 08:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

The IP editor was correct in this case, we don't link articles by the redirect as that increases server workload needlessly. When Mai-Sachme broke 3RR, I suggested that the article be protected as it seemed both editors were headed for a block. Semi-protection seems a bad idea. See what you think of my compromise suggestion. WCM_email 23:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC) PS nice to see you Noclador long time no see. WCM_email 23:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you WCM! The most important thing is to use the name Merano and link directly to the article. I was ready to accept also a compromise such as "...Meran (Merano)..." but your solution is good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.20.3.141 (talk • contribs) 08:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

@Wee Curry Monster: Did you read my other comments on WP:AN3 and carefully examine the "contribution" of the IPs? Not talking only about the nationalistic bollocks going on here (something like 5 reverts, in order to erase a "wrong name"... What kind of people could possibly call "Meran" a "wrong name"?), also about the threats I received and the abusive comments. Did you see, what the IP said to me just a couple of seconds ago? I told you I would keep an eye on you, you've wasted these days after this, but it was your choice. That's stalking and trolling!!!

Regarding your compromise suggestion: I already explained that a couple of times here on this talk page: This kind of wording implies to readers that the town isnt'called Meran or not known by this name anymore. My point being: Meran is still one of the two official names. In fact, it's likely that English native speakers are even more familiar with Meran. Considering these facts, a wording, which suggests that Meran is "now known as Merano" seems quite odd and mistakable to me. If server workload is really an issue, that problem should be solved now. --Mai-Sachme (talk) 23:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Actually if you want a truly independent 3rd opinion, you're both coming across as talking nationalist bollocks. If there are two official names, then we should simply mention them both. You have any objection to the dual name approach suggested by yourself above? WCM_email 23:40, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Let me rewrite a few quotes I took from Talk:Merano he "forgot" to mention:

• "Wikipedia naming convention states to use the most common name in English which is in fact Merano"
• "Bozen and Meran are most commonly called Bolzano and Merano in modern English, so we use those"
• "What the English speakers do is of course more relevant for the English language Wikipedia, so Merano is the correct solution"

Same for Bolzano. You can read them at the top of the page and in the related talk page. I've told him several times: that's the consensus, his opinion isn't more relevant than Wikipedian admins' conventions established years ago, he could go to the talk page and make a proposal for a change. Everything entered an ear just to exit the other one. But at least (and at last!) you've come and resolved it. If we had to choose just 1 name from 2, it would be Merano, no doubts. Using both names would imply that the consensus name should come before the secondary name. Since he deleted the Italian name in favour of the German one, the ultimate solution was to use only the consensus name, Merano, but I agree with your proposal of 2 names and 1 link to Merano. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.20.3.141 (talk • contribs) 08:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh darling, let's have a look at the original version of the page, you started an edit war against: Magnago was born in Meran/Merano. Having Meran in front of Merano was a version you grimly battled against!

And let's read the version, you're cheering now: Magnago was born in Meran/Merano. Lol, I hope you can sleep at night from now on... :D --Mai-Sachme (talk) 08:44, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Tsk tsk tsk... It's not Meran/Merano but Meran/Merano (it takes a little, don't worry if you don't get it at once). I'm sooo-rry for your dear "WP:NOTBROKEN" or whatever. And, more important, your attempt to totally remove the Italian name refusing any compromise has failed (what a pity, to quote you)! Now you can restart living your life out of here and also go back to edit other pages (which I'll be keeping an eye on, don't you forget, Wu...pardon, Woody!)

What a pity you weren't interested in what links where. You didn't remove the link Meran. Your goal was to put the word Meran behind Merano. And you finally failed :-) --Mai-Sachme (talk) 09:16, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

C'mon, Woody: I know you're raged because you've, on your certainly sane point of view, "lost", but just wait, it will pass, you'll return back to your previous happiness, just have patience. And, since you didn't understand (but by now I'm not surprised any more), my "friend's" goal was to put Merano before Meran, I was interested to link to Merano instead of Meran, as I've written this morning in my first reply to WCM and tried proposing when adding Merano to Meran instead of substituting it. But I have to thank you for your being so explicit in your real intentions, in the mentality behind your actions, at least now Wikipedians know who really is the "good boy" Mai-Sachme, and this discussion shall remain here forever...

I was interested to link to Merano instead of Meran... No, you weren't. That was your imaginary friend. And that was you, as you told me personally :-). Your start into the edit war wasn't a removal of the link Meran, your childish goal was to put Merano in front of Meran. And you finally failed.

Version I defended against trolling: Magnago was born in Meran/Merano. Current version of the article: Magnago was born in Meran/Merano. Everything is fine :-) --Mai-Sachme (talk) 09:49, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Nah. You know what you're saying is false. I can prove it. But I want to give you a chance: say it yourself. If you say that you were lying, it'll be over. But if you repeat what you've been saying since this morning, or even if you don't reply at all, I'll do it for you. I'll show everyone you were wrong and just trying getting me angry. Anyhow, the truth shall be said, either by me or by yourself. I'll be waiting... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.20.0.53 (talk) 12:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Worse than I thought... You wrote a reply and deleted it after 2 minutes! Well, before keeping my promise, let me quote it:

No, you just got caught lying. You're claiming now that your only intention was to remove the link Meran. Brief reality check: The best choice would have been leaving the consensus name only, Merano, but it was all right to use them both, remember it was you who removed one of them, not me...

* You wrote: There's one only edit I've ever done regarding South Tyrol with the other IP I used, 46.252.205.187, and you know. And now, let's see what this edit by 46.252.205.187 looked like: Again lies and half-truths... Let's see, let's see, my steamroller is ready!

* Putting Merano in front of Meran, no removal of the link Meran in sight. I don't want to spoil, the answer is at the end of my reply...

It's laughable, that you claim a "victory" now. The entire story here is just sad. If there was a "victory", then by idiocy over common sense. Endless discussions, and at the end of the story the article text states that Magnago was born in Meran/Merano. Exactly the wording you battled against at the beginning, exactly the wording I restored after some trolling! And no, the revision history doesn't lie. In fact it doesn't. You do. And now... Finally I can unmask the "good boy" Mai-Sachme!

If I really wanted to put Merano before Meran... HOW do you explain this edit??? Uh-oh... I see a "Meran" before "Merano"... And wait, "Merano" is closed between parenthesis?! Mumble mumble mumble... Maybe ("maybe", not of course, huh!) does this mean that... My goal wasn't to put Merano before Meran, but something different? Such as... Linking directly to Merano? And maybe the name Merano before Meran was a valid option as long as Meran had the link too but it lost its importance when there were no more links to Meran? Or maybe I'm wrong, you have a better explanation for that... You, the one who removed the Italian name but was finally forced to accept it in the text and also to link directly to Merano instead of Meran. You, who still pretend you don't know the difference between Meran/Merano and Meran/Merano. You, the only one who spoke about "victory". I've never. This shows up your mentality. You threw your mask off. After I had thanked WCM, you started trying getting me angry transforming the "Third opinion" section into a "Let's talk about how WCM's solution is my enemy's defeat". Then you rushed around the Wiki looking for a way you could take at least a little revenge on me appealing to admins. All in all... Well, I won't spoke about victory, but you actually lost twice: both in your "kampf" for Germanity in Italy and in hiding your true self. Thank you so much! And don't forget that... I'll be always taking an eye on you! XXX — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.20.0.53 (talk) 14:01, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

@Wee Curry Monster: I accept your opinion, but it's unfounded. This version seems fine to me. It's almost exactly the original version from a couple of days ago. But guess who didn't like that: [5], [6]...

And yes, I reverted those edits. I'm a regular contributor in the area of South Tyrol and quite used to revert nationalistic bollocks (no matter if coming from the German or Italian side). If I see an (excuse my French) imbecile edit like this one or that one, I'm not going to let that pass. For obvious reasons, I think... --Mai-Sachme (talk) 23:51, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

@Wee Curry Monster: although I am Italian :-), I agree with Mai-Sachme here. Using "Merano" as the birth place of Magnago is an anachronism. Taking a much more important example, at Wikipedia we use "Constantinople" to define Istanbul in contexts prior to the 1920s, since this was the current name used by English sources during that period. The same should apply for Meran/Merano and Bozen/Bolzano. Alex2006 (talk) 05:37, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Guys, I don't have a dog in the fight, so really don't care what the article says. My point was that directing to the subsidiary article via a redirect was bad practice.

If I may make an observation, something learned from bitter personal experience, don't keep replying to "nationalist bollocks", just ignore it and let them rant on themselves. Let them have the WP:LASTWORD. If you keep replying, it looks to an outsider looking in as if you're just as bad. WCM_email 12:50, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Next Steps

I see that at least two editors are engaged in a hostile exchange. A third opinion was requested, but I think that no one really wants consensus; they just want to quarrel. What should be done next? You can go to the dispute resolution noticeboard, but I wouldn't recommend it, because there is so much hostility that discussion will fail. I suggest the use of a Request for Comments, which is binding. Otherwise, take this to WP:ANI and see whether anyone gets blocked or topic-banned. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:04, 2 December 2015 (UTC)