Talk:Vercelli

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Vercelli article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Panissa

Can anyone tell us more about the panissa of Vercelli? There is a Ligurian dish of the same name on the Italian wikipedia [1], but it is made with chickpeas rather than beans.

Sorry, forgot to sign that - Ian Spackman 00:23, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To answer myself, Cookery at vercelli.net has it. It includes salame.
- Ian Spackman 04:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming conventions

Regarding a possible local dialect name for Vercelli: please note that wikipedia as a naming convention; the convention regarding geographic names can be found at: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names). The English wikipedia chooses the most common name in English for its articles and this is by far "Vercelli". Furthermore the Piemontèis wikipedia uses "Vërsèj" (pms:Vërsèj) to name the corresponding article in the local dialect version of wikipedia and there are no reliable sources to be found which prefer the use of "Varsei" over "Vërsèj". noclador (talk) 21:05, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Page locked for three days

As the edit-war over the city's name, alternative name, alternative names, etc. shows no signs of stopping, I've reverted the article to the state it was in before the edit war began, and full-protected the page for three days. I invite the editors who were involved in the content dispute here to discuss their differences over a pot of vermicelli and to work out an acceptable compromise per WP:DISCUSS and WP:CONSENSUS. Let's come to an agreement as the reasonable people we are, so that when the protection expires we can edit the article to reflect consensus and all go home happy (or, at least, not sad), instead of resuming the edit-war and calling in blocks. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:29, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Two weeks and no responses... guess it wasn't important after all. Good. Everyone enjoy their noodles. Stalwart111 01:02, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment (sort of...)

In line with my suggestion at WP:ANI, I thought I'd establish an RFC to allow editors to comment on the question as to whether multiple alternate language/dialect names should be included in the article lede. However, I've not used the {{rfc}} template and have instead opted for a more informal discussion in the hope that this can be resolved fairly quickly in line with The Bushranger's 3-day lock. If not, we can always go for a proper RFC. So with that in mind I have tried to summarise, as well as I am able, what seem to be the key areas of dispute.

1. The question of what the article should be titled seems to have been resolved and there seems to no longer be a desire to move the article to an alternate local language/dialect name. Sufficient redirects exist to assist to bring anyone who searches for the subject using those alternate names to this article. If I'm wrong and this hasn't been resolved, please feel free to suggest as much.

2. There is an ongoing dispute as to whether some/more/all of those alternate names should be listed after the title name to clarify that some may refer to the subject by other names, eg:

Vercelli listen (Vërsèj in Piedmontese, Varsei in Vercellese, X in X dialect/language, etc)

3. There also seems to be some disagreement as to whether or not the alternate names in question (in whatever language) should be verified by reliable sources and, if so, whether proposed sources are sufficient.

If there are other points of contention/disputation, please feel free to list those here too. Stalwart111 08:10, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Main sights of unsightly.

The article doesn't mention that Vercelli is said to have (former) another basilica, the S.S. Name of Mary or Shrine of Our Lady of the Vineyards. It became infested by demons in 1684 and a lot of local girls and even rookie nuns (novicias) were led astray to blackest witchcraft and sex orgies. Unsuccessful exorcism attempts eventually led the Vatican to de-consecrate the site and leave it for natural decay by 1784.

Yet, the structure failed to collapse to this day and remains a scene for sabbatical rites. On its wall an undelible musical score is written, said to summon the Evil One himself if whistled. This artifact of Vercelli is said to cement the reputation of the municipality of Torino, as one of the three top-tier sites of occult evil in Europe (alongside Prague and London). 92.52.245.165 (talk) 22:38, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Vercelli. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20051223004917/http://www.provincia.vercelli.it:80/musei/musei/m_leone.htm to http://www.provincia.vercelli.it/musei/musei/m_leone.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:33, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]