Talk:Inter Milan/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Requested move 28 June 2018

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move
. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not moved. There is an absence of consensus for the proposed move. Based on the previous discussions, it seems unlikely that such consensus will arise without either a relevant change in policy or evidence of a significant change in the way to which the team is referred. bd2412 T 17:48, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Jay
18:14, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose The format and language of the proposed title is an entirely Italian construct and is directly repugnant to the English language. It has no place on en-Wiki. The simple challenge is this - Where is the evidence that "F.C. Internazionale Milano" - the proposed article title - is more common in English sources than the existing title?
    WP:ENGLISH
    which states "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language". "Internazionale" and "Milano" are not even English words and the use of "F.C." at the beginning is virtually unheard of in English football.
Anyway. let's not descend to accusations of
WP:RS
in the English speaking world that is the basis for naming policy on en-Wiki. Personal likes, preferences and comparisons with other foreign sounding articles cannot override established and documented standards.
WP:ENGLISH
is clear; "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources". "Internazionale" and "Milano" are Italian words.
All the evidence is that in the English speaking world Inter Milan outweighs all other usage.
WP:NAME
("Article titles should be recognizable to readers, unambiguous, and consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources.")
WP:UE
("The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage")
WP:MOS#FOREIGN
("Foreign words should be used sparingly")
WP:PLACE
("When a widely accepted English name, in a modern context, exists for a place, we should use it.") Milan not MilanO
WP:COMMONNAME ("The most common name for a subject as determined by its prevalence in reliable English-language sources, is often used as a title because it is recognizable and natural.")
Leaky Caldron
18:50, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
With regard to
Jay
19:15, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
I propose again (a past comment):
WP:ENGLISH
: does not say that we should only use English titles, but we should use titles that are used by English sources, and the proposed title are used in English sources e.g. FIFA and UEFA and many more.
WP:NAME
: Again, F.C. Internazionale Milano is used by English sources, and there is no naming-policy that forbids Italian words when it is used by English sources.
WP:UE
: This policy is about spelling of words with non-anglicized characters, and last time I checked all the characters in F.C. Internazionale Milano where English.
WP:MOS#FOREIGN
- Are you going to translate Royal Madrid, and other football clubs with non-english words in the name aswell?
WP:PLACE
- Are you aware of that we are talking about a football clubs name, not a place?
WP:COMMONNAME - there is no indication that Inter Milan is a more common name then Internazionale or Inter.--Dipralb (talk
) 20:35, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
The club refers to itself as "F.C. Internazionale Milano", exactly like FIFA and UEFA. Inter.it, FIFA and UEFA should be considered primary sources. PS: do you think "F.C. Internazionale" should be a better name?--Dipralb (talk) 21:02, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
BBC, Sky Sports, and The Britannica Guide to Soccer use "Inter Milan." The Kingfisher Soccer Encyclopedia, The Guardian and ESPN use "Internazionale." The proposed title doesn't seem to get significant use, either in terms of sports news or in terms of sports reference works. Nine Zulu queens (talk) 11:35, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Teams' full names are very rarely used, but we use them here to avoid confusion with other subjects (e.g.
Jay
12:01, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. What do you think about this opinion? According to this user, "writing Inter Milan make confusion since people say Inter Milan to refer to derby game between Inter and Milan".--Dipralb (talk) 21:13, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per PeeJay and Dipralb. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 21:25, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Hhkohh (talk) 23:20, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per nom, per NCST this name is used on the English-language section of the club's official website (recent example). The name also has been adopted by a significant section of the English-language media and is recognizable. S.A. Julio (talk) 00:19, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Inter Milan may be a common nickname for the club in the anglosphere, probably as common as Spurs or Barça in journalistic pieces, but we don't use those in the respective articles' names. Inter Milan should be just a redirect to the official name, which is also how the club often refers to itself in English news ([1], [2],[3], [4] just in the past few days). --Tanonero (msg) 07:04, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Ahah "This is tabloidpedia and we use WP:TABLOIDNAMES" again? Just joking, obviously Support unless we're moving Tottenham to "Spurs". In ictu oculi (talk) 08:03, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
You're absolutely right.--Dipralb (talk) 14:35, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
@Crowsus: "FC Bayern Munich" is used officially be the German club's English website. Matthew_hk tc 09:14, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
OK, but I checked 'Red Star' there, and their English version uses "FK Crvena zvezda" to describe themselves. So, again, inconsistency. Crowsus (talk) 10:14, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
I think the "consistency" is non-Latin name had their own treatment. No one know that Црвена звезда it is nor 江苏苏宁. For very straight bit by bit transliteration it should be Crvena zvezda and Jiāngsū Sūníng but the latter had its own official English name (which common in Chinese transliteration to remove the tone number) as Jiangsu Suning. For Inter Milan or "F.C. Internazionale Milano" it is hardly for people don't understand Internazionale is the full spelling of Inter and Milano is the Italian spelling of Milan (so did Napoli, Torino and Roma), and it is not very rare that "Internazionale" was used by common English media. Matthew_hk tc 10:25, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Why don't we use "Inter de Porto Alegre"?
Sport Club Internacional is exactly the same situation. English media use "Inter de Porto Alegre" but the title is correctly "Sport Club Internacional".--Dipralb (talk
) 14:50, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Athletic Bilbao is not the official name, but that - merely Athletic Club - is too ambiguous in English so I can see why it is an exception. However, Atlético Madrid is also used, when the official name is Club Atlético de Madrid, so its also similar to Inter Milan, but it so happens that the name of the city is the same in English as the native, unlike Milan(o). Crowsus (talk) 12:45, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports teams) is clear: we should use the name that the club uses in the English language section of its own website. UEFA and FIFA don't consider "F.C Internazionale Milano" too ambiguous in English, I don't understand the problem. There is a clear naming convention for sport teams.--Dipralb (talk) 14:30, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support for WP:CONSISTENCY with all other Italian football club articles (and pretty much all football club articles), which are at their formal titles. Like Yogurt, this a move that will keep being requested until we finally get it right, so let's hope it's this time. Number 57 13:14, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: this is the only football club on this entire site that uses a nickname rather than the actual name. The only one. It's a ridiculous outlier, and the name should've never been changed to Inter Milan in the first place. Italia2006 (talk) 14:19, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - unnecessarily clunky name. Unreal7 (talk) 14:48, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
    • How is it clunky? It's the club's name. Clunkiness definitely isn't an argument when it comes to article names to avoid. –
      Jay
      14:59, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. Another example: English media use "Inter de Porto Alegre" or simply "Porto Alegre", Portuguese media refer to the club as "Inter", but the title is correctly "
    Sport Club Internacional".--Dipralb (talk
    ) 14:55, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment to closer
    WP:CONLIMITED is very clear. Consensus among a limited group of editors, at one place and time, cannot override community consensus on a wider scale. For instance, unless they can convince the broader community that such action is right, participants in a wikiproject cannot decide that some generally accepted policy or guideline does not apply to articles within its scope. Leaky Caldron
    15:02, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
IMHO, the move was clearly more controversial than the duration of the RM that moved the article.--Dipralb (talk) 15:19, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Not to mention the fact that if the broader community don't intend to involve themselves in the discussion, the local consensus has to apply. Furthermore, we have a Wikipedia guideline that supports the use of the name "F.C. Internazionale Milano" (see
Jay
15:37, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
That is not a policy.
WP:AT are the relevant policies. The local consensus certainly does not "have" to apply. It is a not popularity contest for football fans. Leaky Caldron
17:28, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
If you have an issue with the wording (or even the existence) of
Jay
17:32, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
And editors have already showed Inter Milan is not the most "commonname" in English, so that guide is practically out. NCST is a lot more relevant in this case. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 17:50, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
I agree with PeeJay.
WP:NCST is more specific about sport teams. If it exists, it should be applied.--Dipralb (talk
) 19:23, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support To all the naïve users that believe because it is the English Wiki, it should adopt the English language name I say this - Juventus is a Latin word, the team name translates to Youths, now if this is an English wiki, why is the article not title Youths F.C. or perhaps even Juve. How about A.S. Roma, as we all know the English translation is 'Rome', but why then is Roma the name of the article on the English wiki if it isn't an English word? Or how about Royal Madrid, FC Basle anyone? SMADG85 (talk) 18:04, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Please take it from someone who practically lives and breathes Inter. No one calls it Internazionale, it's such an awkward name that I've literally never heard anyone in person use it. Inter Milan in English, just Inter in Italian. In fact personally i'd prefer Inter in the English wiki as well, but I understand that is not an option. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheInterFan (talk • contribs) 11:02, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
    • We're not proposing that the article be called "Internazionale", we're proposing that it be called by its full name, "F.C. Internazionale Milano". Saying this article should be called "Inter Milan" is like saying
      Jay
      11:50, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
    • I don't mean this in a harsh way, but your supporting this club has no bearing or relevance whatsoever in a discussion over the article's name. Italia2006 (talk) 17:17, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
      • I agre with Italia2006. There's a policy (NCST).--Dipralb (talk) 17:56, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
        • You are not a native English speaker. You need to understand that is NOT a policy. It is nothing more than a little guideline. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leaky caldron (talk • contribs) 10:20, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
          • So... what’s the point in it existing?--Dipralb (talk) 10:45, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
            • Indeed.
              Jay
              11:04, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
              • Dozens of evidence based policies have been quoted every time you have raised this over the years. Your real dificulty is that no matter how hard you try you can provide no quantitive
                WP:RS in the ENGLISH language to support your pet wish to contrive to make Italian words more common as a name than the established English common title compliant with actual wiki article naming policy. As commented by others, NOTHING has changed. Leaky Caldron
                11:28, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
                • @
                  Jay
                  11:37, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per the arguments of Dipralb, Tanonero, Linhart and one or two others. The use of the nickname is an anomaly. A redirect from Inter Milan will easily solve any issues much like it does with the likes of Man City and Man Utd etc. Liam E. Bekker (talk) 19:12, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Procedural oppose it seems this article's name appears to be discussed almost every 12 to 6 months and it is getting kinda tiring. Not much has changed since the most recent discussion and I personally do not find the supporter's rational that convincing, so I am going with an oppose on purely procedural grounds. Inter&anthro (talk) 05:23, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Comment This policy-based Not Moved decision from 3 years ago still perfectly sets out the current position which has not altered in any material way policy-wise or evidence-wise. ............... the opposes had the stronger policy argument, as borne out by available evidence: "Inter Milan" appears to be much more common in the English-language reliable sources. As such, it better fits the spirit WP:COMMONNAME and other conditions of the article titles policy. As no fresh evidence has been produced and it is the same tired rationale by those who do not like current policy naming for soccer teams. Let us be clear, this is English language WP, not Italian language WP. Leaky Caldron 13:15, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

  • I don't understand this strong opposition... I repeat, the move was clearly more controversial than the duration of the RM that moved the article. There are several opinions that don’t seem to be considered. But I respect you.--Dipralb (talk) 14:04, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move
. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Other Departments

I propose to add an infobox with other sections of the club, maybe even the defunct one, (

Real Madrid
, ...).

Ref: it.wiki https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_Club_Internazionale_Milano#Attivit%C3%A0_polisportiva

Lucas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.232.219.68 (talk) 17:53, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

The navigation template at the end of the list had the same function already. Inter is not a multi-sport club. Also i doubt the connection between basketball, rugby, hockey clubs and FC Inter. Those articles are poorly sourced, and they are defunct, unlike other multi-sport club. In other multi-sport club (such as Turkey an Greece), basketball section or volleyball are equally notable so it had a need of ANOTHER navigation template, but not for FC Inter. Matthew hk (talk) 18:53, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

The club is called "Internazionale" by UEFA (and FIFA), why Wikipedia should call it Inter Milan?

As already mentioned on the 2018-2019 UEFA Champions League page, please note that UEFA (which is the European confederation regulating European football) calls the club "Internazionale" on its official website and on its official documents. As UEFA is the most reliable and respected source for (European) football, Wikipedia should follow this type of source and not British newspapers such as "The Sun" or "The Guardian" which are not football dedicated media or organizations. For this reason the club should always be called "Internazionale" (and at least on UEFA competitions pages) in order for Wikipedia to be in line with the name used for the club within the Italian, European and international football system. --Blocci (talk) 15:36, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

What was the big section two entries above this one about? Britmax (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Considering only two people who opposed the move request above with policy-based rationales, and those rationales were thoroughly debunked, I'd say that big section was closed prematurely and incorrectly. –
Jay
16:35, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Guidelines on Article Titles

I want to lay out the various considerations on article titles, so that I can think clearly about this question. Perhaps this will help others.

  • Wikipedia has a policy page dedicated to article titles(
    WP:TITLE
    ). The policy lays out five criteria for good titles:
    • Recognizability – The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject area will recognize.
    • Naturalness – The title is one that readers are likely to look or search for and that editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles. Such a title usually conveys what the subject is actually called in English.
    • Precision – The title unambiguously identifies the article's subject and distinguishes it from other subjects. (See § Precision and disambiguation, below.)
    • Conciseness – The title is no longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects. (See § Conciseness, below)
    • Consistency – The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles. Many of these patterns are listed (and linked) as topic-specific naming conventions on article titles, in the box above.
  • In addition, the policy gives what I think is a relevant example: "For instance, the recognizable, natural, and concise title United Kingdom is preferred over the more precise title United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland."
  • A subsection of the policy article is the subsection titled
    WP:COMMONNAME
    says "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)"
    • It also asks to consider major international organizations: "it is useful to observe the usage of major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies, and notable scientific journals."
  • The page has a lot more information that is relevant to this discussion, such as the subsection
    WP:TRANSLITERATE
    . I'll pause here for the moment.

The takeaway from this article seems to me to be that Inter Milan wins on more counts than FC Internazionale Milano (even though I personally prefer the latter. That being said, I think one could make an exception if we believe that Inter Milan is a widely and commonly used nickname, and Wikipedia Article titles should provide the proper names of subjects. —Approaching (talk) 03:10, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

The obvious drawback being as simple as this "Internazionale" and "Milano" and "Internazionale Milano" are indisputably Italian language. No one in English speaking countries when referring to International would say "Internazionale". Nor "Milano" for Milan and not for Inter Milan, "Internazionale Milano".
This is the English Language WP. Article title must confirm to en-WP Policy - even if that involves a so-called nickname - it is nevertheless universally understood in the English speaking world. Bringing this back on a virtual annual basis without a change in policy or evidence is disruptive. Leaky caldron (talk) 10:00, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
I see what you mean. You're right that Internazionale and Milano are not English words. But Internazionale Milano is a name, and we don't transliterate names. We don't transliterate Giampiero to John-Peter. Or Lamborghini Diablo to Lamborghini Devil. —Approaching (talk) 21:45, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
But see
WP:OFFICIALNAME. We use the commonest name in English-language sources, whether that is a nickname, abbreviated name or full name. -- Necrothesp (talk
) 10:29, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
I agree with this conclusion in the end. I think Inter Milan is a much uglier name than, Internazionale Milano or even la beneamata, but the guidelines are in favor of Inter Milan. —Approaching (talk)
Indeed. Yet more evidence that the repeated attempts to RN this article is a seriously flawed request when the key policy and associated guidelines are against using foreign language wording on en-WP. Leaky caldron (talk) 12:04, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Just because it is an Italian word doesn't mean it doesn't have use in the English-language, as users have shown the large use of "Internazionale" in English-language sources, so saying "No one in English speaking countries when referring to International [?] would say "Internazionale", is wrong. What no one would use to refer to the club is "International" - that's ridiculous.
WP:TRANSLITERATE: The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage, e.g. the non-anglicized titles Besançon, Søren Kierkegaard, and Göttingen are used because they predominate in English language reliable sources, whereas for the same reason the anglicized title forms Nuremberg, Delicatessen, and Florence are used (as opposed to Nürnberg, Delikatessen, and Firenze, respectively). An English word is not always the best option, as in this case English-language sources would support "Internazionale", and would comply with the policy. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★
14:33, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
That might be true, absent of evidence of pure English being the predominant usage. But plain English is absolutely predominant in English sources, including the official website in the English and Italian flavours. There is simply no requirement to drop down to Italian. It also does not fulfil the requirements of
WP:TITLE which identifies Recognizability, Naturalness, Precision, Conciseness and Consistency as necessary characteristics. No Italian words can fulfil those objectives. Leaky caldron (talk
) 15:15, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
What do you mean by "plain English is absolutely predominant in English sources, including the official website in the English and Italian flavours"? You're arguing for the use of the name "Inter Milan", but the number of times that name appears on the English version of inter.it could be counted on one hand. Furthermore, as has been pointed out to you, "Inter" is not an English word, it's just a contraction of "Internazionale", which rather blows your argument to smithereens. –
Jay
09:35, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 29 August 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Common name and conciseness fought to a draw against, well, common name as well as consistency. Lots of good arguments on both sides. We'll probably continue having these move requests until the article is finally moved someday, and then we'll probably have continual move requests until it gets moved back, too. (non-admin closure) Red Slash 06:07, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Inter Milan → F.C. Internazionale Milano – The club's full name is Football Club Internazionale Milano and it's commonly refereed to with numerous names such as Inter Milan, Internazionale and many other names. However, after taking a look at Category:Serie A clubs I noticed that this article doesn't match other articles in the category (all clubs in the category are using their formal names unlike this one). So per WP:CONSISTENCY, per the club's official account at UEFA.com, and per previous similar discussion at Talk:Rangers International F.C. I believe that this article should be moved to F.C. Internazionale Milano or FC Internazionale Milano. Ben5218 (talk) 22:52, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose per
    Calidum
    00:14, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
    • The fact that Internazionale Milano isn't the common name isn't really relevant in my opinion, as the convention for naming football club articles is to use the proper name and not just the common name; otherwise articles such as AFC Ajax would be named Ajax Amsterdam instead. Ben5218 (talk) 00:22, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Not at all true, since the common name in the English-speaking world is simply Ajax, which obviously needs disambiguation, not Ajax Amsterdam. The article title therefore entirely fits in with normal Wikipedia naming conventions. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:55, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: I know it's not the first criteria to change the name of the page, but if you look at the italian [5] and french [6] versions of the page, they are both named FC Internazionale Milano, which is, in my opinion, the proper name for the page. RafaelS1979 (talk) 01:00, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: I think that Wikipedia has had a problem with the naming of club articles for a while now, and Inter perfectly encapsulates it. The English names of several clubs (e.g. "Inter Milan", "Atletico Madrid", "Red Star Belgrade") are not what the clubs are referred to in their home country and are simply not authentic. I would support article titles to be in the form as the clubs are officially recognised by UEFA, such as with the latest UCL draw: [7]. LeoC12 (talk) 01:57, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
    • I also noteced that in the most recent draw they used "FK Crvena zvezda" for exemple (actually, they used FK CRVENA ZVEZDA all in caps as for all clubs, but the native name in Serbian has indeed the "zvezda" and not "Zvezda"). However, its one of those cases where the club is enough popular to be recognised by its translated name form in most languages, so the last RfM ended in favour of Red Star Belgrade as most common name in English media and literature. FkpCascais (talk) 06:29, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Not to mention the fact that the club sometimes refers to itself as "Red Star" on its website (see [8] and [9]). –
        Jay
        06:41, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
        • I must be missing it probably, but in both links all that appears to me is in Serbian and Cyrillic... But an exemple can be their own Serbian page called "Ред Стар шоп (translated "Red Star shop)". I think they use even in their equipment FC Red Star, at least I remember recently seing them wear it and also written in their Media spaces in the stadium. But they use it for their foreign representation, domestically they undoubtably use FK Crvena zvezda. FkpCascais (talk) 07:26, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
          • There's a globe icon in the top corner that lets you change the language to English. I searched the site for "Red Star" and a few results came up, albeit not as many as "Crvena zvezda" (out of interest, why doesn't the "zvezda" have a capital letter; respond on my talk page please 🙂). –
            Jay
            09:50, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
            • I've noticed all that too, but my main point, regardless of whether the club is called 'Red Star' or 'Crvena zvezda', the relevant insitutions use the conventions of the home country, i.e. UEFA does not refer to Red Star as 'Red Star Belgrade' because that usage simply doesn't exist in Serbia. For me, the same standard should be applied to Inter; 'Inter' is a common nickname in both Italy and the English-speaking world, but the article title should be the official name. We can always include somethign like 'commonly referred to as Inter Milan in English' in the lede anyway. LeoC12 (talk) 01:36, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. I had stated that ESPN FC had use "Inter Milan" and "Internazionale " as common names in the same news article, and some other news website such as Football Italia, even use "Inter" only. See also BBC ([10][11][12])
Juventus F.C. instead of Juventus, Udinese Calcio instead of Udinese, using "F.C. Internazionale Milano" would fit WP:CONSISTENCY
.
Also, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (sports teams) existed, which "Inter Milan" violated the naming convention, and "F.C. Internazionale Milano" did not violate. Please discuss the revision of the naming convention for solving the anomaly "Inter Milan".
The naming convention stated: The name is used on the English-language section of the club's official website. Which at the footnote part of the website inter.it, wrote : Copyright © 1995—2019 F.C. Internazionale Milano P.IVA 04231750151, and the title of the front page of the website wrote Inter.it Home Page | Inter Official Site | FC Internazionale Milano. Matthew hk (talk) 02:49, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
Support. I would prefer just "
WP:NCST and WP:CONSISTENCY so it should be changed. TrailBlzr (talk
) 05:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – As others have pointed out above, and as I have stated in previous RMs, the club has multiple common names ("Inter", "Inter Milan", "Internazionale"), none of which stands out particularly ahead of the others as the predominant one. For this reason alone, it stands to reason – at least to me – that we should not prefer any one of them as the title of this article. For the sake of consistency between all Italian football club articles, we should prefer the club's full name, FC Internazionale Milano. Furthermore, we have
    Jay
    06:39, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 07:32, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
Anyway. let's not descend to accusations of
WP:RS
in the English speaking world that is the basis for naming policy on en-Wiki. Personal likes, preferences and comparisons with other foreign sounding articles cannot override established and documented standards.
WP:ENGLISH
is clear; "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources". "Internazionale" and "Milano" are Italian words.
All the evidence is that in the English speaking world Inter Milan outweighs all other usage.
WP:NAME
("Article titles should be recognizable to readers, unambiguous, and consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources.")
WP:UE
("The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage")
WP:MOS#FOREIGN
("Foreign words should be used sparingly")
WP:PLACE
("When a widely accepted English name, in a modern context, exists for a place, we should use it.") Milan not MilanO
WP:COMMONNAME ("The most common name for a subject as determined by its prevalence in reliable English-language sources, is often used as a title because it is recognizable and natural.")
Leaky caldron (talk
) 07:55, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
@PD Rivers:. BBC used Internazionale in this page [14] , Inter and Inter Milan in this page [15], Inter Milan and F.C. Internazionale Milano in this page [16]. BBC use more often "Inter Milan" but it is not the only common name they used for the team. Matthew hk (talk) 00:52, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose This is English Wikipedia as as the first few lines of the article states, it is only really called Internazionale in Italy. Most British people know the club as Inter Milan and in fact the few times I've seen it called Internazionale were all on Wikipedia. I think for simplicity it should remain Inter Milan as that's what the majority of English speakers know it as. Mn1548 (talk) 22:28, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Evidence has been presented that Wikipedia is not the only place you can see the club referred to as Internazionale, including The Guardian and ESPN. The Independent also refers to them as Internazionale, in addition to using both "Inter Milan" and just "Inter"; this lends credence to my argument above that "Inter Milan" is not the predominant short name for the club. In addition, FC Barcelona refers to them as "Internazionale". Simplicity is not a criterion when it comes to deciding what an article should be called. After all, we wouldn't be having this issue if the article hadn't been moved in the first place. –
      Jay
      23:22, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Leaky Cauldron. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 23:28, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment - They recently set up
    a women's team, who got promoted into Serie A for this season and have been signing overseas players. FWIW the accompanying news articles in Czech, Dutch, French, Portuguese and Swedish all seem to prefer Inter Milan. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk
    ) 11:54, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
@Bring back Daz Sampson: Foreign source is not that relevant to decide the article title in English wikipedia. Also, people had pointed out even English language source, has also used "Internazionale". Off-topic, your Czech source use "Interu Milán" (see also cs:Milán), your Belgian source use "Inter" and "Internazionale", as well as Milanezen for diminutive form of the city (see also wiktionary:nl:Milanezen). Yes l'equipe use "Inter Milan", but it only prove the common name in French language, not in English. Also, your Portuguese source actually use "Inter Milão" (see also pt:Milão). The Finnish source you used, actually use "Inter" only. The official instagram of the football club use "Inter" and "Inter Women" BTW. Matthew hk (talk) 20:53, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Support I am going to go with support the change. I am wondering how many of you understand the different between a formal name and informal name. "Inter Milan" although common, is an informal name of "Internazionale Milano" which is the formal name. COMMONNAME is the practice of providing a name to the top of the article that most people know. However
    MOS:AT already provides an example for how a football club articles should be named and is using Inverness City F.C. as it's example. What lots of people are forgetting is how important the rule of MOS:AT is, it sets the consistency for how a whole group of articles should be named. WP:CONSISTENCY has been mentioned above, to also ignore this is a dam right crime. There should not be any anomalies like this on wikipedia, there can be exceptions to the rules, but I don't think this is one of them. The format should be followed and COMMONNAME is a void argument here. Govvy (talk
    ) 11:57, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose, the short name is better and more in use. --Gomaza (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
    • You're going to have to define "better". And as people have pointed out above, no one is disputing that people refer to the club more by its informal name "Inter Milan" than as "FC Internazionale Milano", but "Inter Milan" is used about the same as "Internazionale" or just "Inter", hence we opt for the formal name. –
      Jay
      09:58, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
    • Better? More in use? Naming articles isn't based on these; we are not talking about which name better or common. It's simple: The title should be the club's official, formal name which is F.C. Internazionale Milano. Anything else except this shouldn't be used. Ben5218 (talk) 20:43, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
And doesn't this violates both
WP:NCST and WP:CONSISTENCY? Considering this is the only Italian club that uses an informal name as their title on Wikipedia? Ben5218 (talk
) 03:30, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Th below subsection looks remarkably similar to a contribution I have been preparing in my Sandbox over the last few days. I will continue with my intention to post it here.

Rather than responding to several individual !supports all over the place which I regard as an approach verging on badgering, I will add some further new research en-bloc (here, because there is a per !vote above based on my original Oppose).
Per POLICY,

WP:TITLE
: A good Wikipedia article title has the five following characteristics. I have added my own emphasis of the salient points:

Recognizability – The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject area will recognize.
Naturalness – The title is one that readers are likely to look or search for and that editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles. Such a title usually conveys what the subject is actually called in English.
Precision – The title unambiguously identifies the article's subject and distinguishes it from other subjects. (See § Precision and disambiguation, below.)
There is already disambiguation links on Internazionale
Conciseness – The title is no longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects. (See § Conciseness, below)
Consistency – The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles.

Inter Milan in the English language is clearly without a doubt the title which satisfies each of these characteristics compared with the foreign language "Internazionale Milano". It is recognisable and used far more widely in English speaking sources. It is plainly more natural than an Italian construct within English speaking nations. There is no doubt it is both precise and concise.
As far as Consistency is concerned, this is mentioned in some !Supports. The Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(sports_teams) which is linked from the above policy states the following:

  • The name is used on the English-language section of the club's official website
  • The name has been adopted at least by a significant section of the English-language media and it is recognizable
  • The name is not easily confused with other clubs' names.

The 2nd & 3rd are clearly satisfied. But most significant is the reference to the English-language section of the clubs official website. [18]. "Inter" is not only the prominent title, it is the dominant usage on that page, appearing 40 times. Even on the Italian version [19] "Inter" appears 45 times compared with 4 for the full Italian name. Finally, it has to be pointed out that several of those supporters of the change are also part of

WP:PROJ WikiProjects are not rule-making organizations. WikiProjects have no special rights or privileges compared to other editors and may not impose their preferences on articles. Leaky caldron (talk
) 07:18, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

In reference to your comments about use of the name "Inter" on the club's official website, the site is predominantly for fans, so it would be a little jarring to use the full name. The point is not the prevalence of the name on the club's website, but that they actually use it. The name appears in the title bar of the browser window when you access the website, it appears in the copyright information at the bottom of the page, and it appears quite notably on this page. A name they do not use, however, is "Inter Milan". –
Jay
10:48, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
talk page or in a move review
. No further edits should be made to this section.

THE LOGOOOOOO!!!

I'm an Italian Inter Milan fan, watch out for trolls!!! This is a deliberately asymmetrical logo probably put by a frustrated opponent fan, before there was the right one...Please put it back!!! And be more careful in the future, thanks. Kalabio (talk) 21:10, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

What...? Mattythewhite (talk) 21:23, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Internazionale Milano 2014.svg this is the right one, pay attencion to the difference Super Mirai Trunks (talk) 13:49, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Just look at the German and French Inter pages and you'll see it. That one was here too, but now I don't why there's another one, and it's WRONG Super Mirai Trunks (talk) 13:51, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

don't know why* Super Mirai Trunks (talk) 13:53, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FC_Internazionale_Milano#/media/Fichier%3AInter_Milan.png You blind or what? Super Mirai Trunks (talk) 13:56, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Spelling error on top of article

The second last line at the top of the page says "higgest" not "highest". Just wanted to report that

72.142.23.138 (talk) 21:52, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks.  Done. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 22:08, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

THE L-O-G-O!

Guys, seriously, just tell me why there's that wrong logo. At least just tell me the reason why. If you look at the German Wikipedia page or the French Wikipedia page about Inter, you'll see the RIGHT logo! This one is (a little bit, but still) asymmetrical, and since I'm an Inter fan, it really bothers me. That's unfair, expecially because I remember that on this page too THERE WAS the right logo! C'mon... Super Mirai Trunks (talk) 12:19, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

? It's exactly the same image as used on the Italian wikipedia, I don't see what you're on about. Govvy (talk) 12:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Historical kits

In the Colours and Badge section that in 1928 Inter were forced to change their kit to black and white with a red cross on the jersey. It then goes on to imply that they wore that until the fascist government had fallen from power. However I have found multiple images of Inter Milan in the 1930s wearing blue and black. Their is even a photo on Giuseppe Meazza's page showing him playing Juventus in a black and blue kit and its dated "pre 1933" can someone change the wording in the Colours and Badge section to match it? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:40, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2020

Please change "In recent years, post-Calciopoli, Inter have developed a rivalry with Roma, having finished runners-up to Inter in all but one of Inter's five Scudetto-winning seasons between 2005 and 2010" to "In the 2000s, post-Calciopoli, Inter developed a rivalry with Roma, who finished as runners-up to Inter in all but one of Inter's five Scudetto-winning seasons between 2005 and 2010." 1) 2005 is no longer "in recent years", so the phrase should be removed and it should not say "have developed" or "have finished". 2) "finished as runners-up" is better grammar. 3) As currently phrased, it looks like Inter have finished second to themselves. 2001:BB6:4713:4858:4C5B:3658:ACE6:B82A (talk) 10:44, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done. Also removed Calciopoli as it doesn't seem that relevant to Inter and Roma. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
I took "post-Calciopoli" to mean that when Juventus were relegated, Inter needed new rivals and Roma took on the job. But your edit was excellent. Thank you. 2001:BB6:4713:4858:5DEB:5937:1202:663B (talk) 12:51, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Internazionale or Inter, not "Inter Milan"

The club's official name is Internazionale, which can be abbreviated in Inter. Please note that these are the names used by the club's official website and by leading international football organizations as UEFA and FIFA.

The term "Inter Milan" is only a nickname, used by some commentators or websites, not by relevant football organizations or the club. This fact is well known, as it is also already stated by the source used on the front page of the Wikipedia page of the club. --Vesakin (talk) 09:17, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

It was discussed before however a lot of editors have gone with Inter Milan for being the most
WP:COMMONNAME. Govvy (talk
) 11:14, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey Inter have just renamed and have got a new badge
They are now called Inter Milan Anonymoususertd2008 (talk) 10:41, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

No, they haven't changed the name, what you are talking about is, from March, maybe, a change in merchandising material for promotion, nothing more. The name is, and will remain Football Club Internazionale Milano. --Foghe (talk) 12:09, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Ah, but the common name of "Inter Milan" now appears to have even more substantiation if the club themselves have recognised that's what they're known as! Victory!! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 12:14, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
That's not the name they're changing to though. If anything, this diminishes the argument that the club should be known as "Inter Milan". – PeeJay 16:35, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
They're changing to "Inter Milano," probably just to scream out loud and force the English speakers to stop calling them "Inter Milan." From now on they're Inter Milano and English commentators will (likely) be calling them that. Ezio's Assassin (talk) 15:41, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Wrong accusation on RM is started by paid user. Please read the old RM, people that is not paid editor has provided citation that English media use Inter Milan and Internazionale interchangeably. Matthew hk (talk) 14:39, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

I think in March there would be justification for a RM on the name change and it is one I would support - we use Roma, Napoli and Torino as the team names because, well, they are, even though the city name of each in English is different. Genoa and (AC) Milan are the opposite due to their origins. 'Inter Milano' would belong in the first group and that short two word title would be suitable for the Wikipedia player infobox, match reports etc. But that all needs to wait until after a change is made officially. Crowsus (talk) 16:25, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
I would say no. At least until common name is changed . Likes ESPN, BBC and other English media stop to use Inter Milan / Internazainoale AND use Inter Milano instead. People always can open a RM , but also beware of snow close due to lack of evidence. Matthew hk (talk) 14:15, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2021

It should be ”Inter” or ”FC Internazionale Milano”, not ”Inter Milan”. To call Inter ”Inter Milan” is like calling Pepsi ”Pepsi Coke”. Sebbex2x (talk) 22:36, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

. Sebbex2x (talk) 22:36, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Please see
talk • contribs
 22:43, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:56, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:23, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 22 January 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: At the heart of the matter is which should be prioritised:

QPR). For these reasons, the result of the discussion is that the article should be moved. (non-admin closure) Sceptre (talk
) 18:24, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

After further discussion, I've agreed to change the result to no consensus, but I remain of the opinion that it's still a marginal close. Sceptre (talk) 10:30, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Inter Milan → F.C. Internazionale Milano – It's incorrect to call this article "Inter Milan" since it's the club's nickname, even if it's sometimes used by the media. It's been more than two years since I requested this change back in mid-2019, and I still strongly suggest that the proposed name is the best option for the following reasons:

  • The club's official name is "Football Club Internazionale Milano" and so this article should be titled F.C. Internazionale Milano. As simple as that.
  • In Category:Football clubs in Italy, the title of all articles features the club's official names rather than the common or nickname, and as a result this article should be no different to match WP:CONSISTENCY.
  • The club's article on various other languages on Wikipedia, such as the Italian language, features the club's full/official name.
  • A similar discussion held in
    LAFC was declined because acronyms, such as MUFC, or nicknames, such as Man Utd, are not used here, and so I believe that this article should be treated the same way. Ben5218 (talk
    ) 15:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC).

Oppose Nothing has changed to facilitate a change denied in the previous 5 failed requests. All facts and evidence remains the same as those 5 rejected requests.

  • The format and language of the proposed title is an entirely Italian construct. It is directly repugnant to the English language. The simple challenge is this - Where is the evidence that "F.C. Internazionale Milano" - the proposed article title - is more common in English sources than the existing title?
    WP:ENGLISH
    which states "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language. "Internazionale" and "Milano" are not even English words and the use of "F.C." at the beginning is virtually unheard of in English football.
Anyway. let's not descend to accusations of
WP:RS
in the English speaking world that is the basis for naming policy on en-Wiki. Personal likes, preferences and comparisons with other foreign sounding articles cannot override established and documented standards.
WP:ENGLISH
is clear; "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources". "Internazionale" and "Milano" are Italian words.
All the evidence is that in the English speaking world Inter Milan outweighs all other usage.
WP:NAME
("Article titles should be recognizable to readers, unambiguous, and consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources.")
WP:UE
("The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage")
WP:MOS#FOREIGN
("Foreign words should be used sparingly")
WP:PLACE
("When a widely accepted English name, in a modern context, exists for a place, we should use it.") Milan not MilanO
WP:COMMONNAME ("The most common name for a subject as determined by its prevalence in reliable English-language sources, is often used as a title because it is recognizable and natural.") Leaky caldron (talk
) 19:39, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
But this still does not change the fact that there is no club called Inter Milan, as pointed out be few users in a previous discussion. It's clear that the club is referred to by the media as Inter Milan, but that's not the club name, it's a nickname. This is a football club, not a stadium or a park, and so we should use the official name rather than what the media likes to call it. The club is called F.C. Internazionale Milano, and so the article's name should be F.C. Internazionale Milano, whether it's common in English language or not. Also, note that in the Serie A seasons' articles, like the 2021–22 season for example, the club is referred to as Internazionale and not Inter Milan. Ben5218 (talk) 10:43, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
At the same time, according to
WP:NCST: "In cases where there is no ambiguity as to the official spelling of a club's name in English, the official name should be used. No ambiguity means that the name is used on the English-language section of the club's official website". By searching for the club's website, you will clearly find the club using FC Internazionale Milano. Ben5218 (talk
) 22:13, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Indisputably the common, common name though. Leaky caldron (talk) 21:07, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
But still, F.C. Internazionale Milano also passes
WP:NCST. Please take a look at my reply on Calidum's comment above. Ben5218 (talk
) 22:13, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment I am too tired for this RM so that i don't cast a "vote" this time. But i want to point out that
    WP:criteria
    :

The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles. Many of these patterns are listed (and linked) as topic-specific naming conventions on article titles, in the box above

, so that please have a look at
Sampdoria. Matthew hk (talk
) 06:17, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
It's to do with English language sources.
WP:COMMONNAME states, among other things Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources). "Milano" is neither English or commonly used in relevant English language sources, whereas "Inter Milan" is by far the most common usage in those sources. Leaky caldron (talk
) 13:59, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Again, we are discussing a football club and not a company or a stadium; it's not about what's the club's common name or what the media likes to call it. With this logic, we will have to move
WP:NCST is clear and should be used in this case: "In cases where there is no ambiguity as to the official spelling of a club's name in English, the official name should be used. No ambiguity means that the name is used on the English-language section of the club's official website". Even the club refers to itself as FC Internazionale Milano on their official website in English. Ben5218 (talk
) 14:34, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
We use "F.C." mostly as a disambiguator when football clubs have the same name as the town they're located in. Nothing wrong with that. Rangers isn't actually commonly called Glasgow Rangers anyway. It's called Rangers. Again, we add the F.C. for disambiguation from everything else called Rangers. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:43, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
@Necrothesp:. Now you are suggesting FC in quite a lot of case is useless as it is a disambiguator for nothing:
and so on. And yet why they still have FC in it? It is purely consistency citerion? So why Internazionale aka Inter Milan is the exception that does not need F.C.? Matthew hk (talk) 04:03, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Yes, it's a nickname, but this is one of the few football clubs that is overwhelmingly known by its nickname. Very clear common name in English-language sources. Few people would know it as F.C. Internazionale Milano, but most people, even non-football fans like me, know what Inter Milan is. Citing "Man United" is an inaccurate comparison, as more people probably actually call it by its full name and everyone knows what its full name is. That is simply not the case with Inter Milan. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:36, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
    • @Necrothesp: Few people would know it as F.C. Internazionale Milano? Really, I bet there is strong support for the club, maybe over 400,000 hard core fans, a couple of million people world wide. I wouldn't call that a few people! :/ lol. Govvy (talk) 23:37, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

    • Very clear common name in English-language sources.

      . Nope. Inter Milan is only one of the common name of the club. BBC still uses the alternative "Internazionale" in 2021 ([28]) , so did ESPN ([29]). And if you insist the common name. BBC actually use
      Sporting Lisbon thus making the RM of that article to Sporting CP
      became more inconsistent.
    • Note that Sporting Lisbon has way higher ranking in google ngram than Sporting CP or the full name. Matthew hk (talk) 04:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
    • @Necrothesp: "Citing "Man United" is an inaccurate comparison, as more people probably actually call it by its full name"? I don't think that's true at all, as demonstrated by your use of the word "probably". Look at the BBC's page for the club: they seem to mostly use the name "Man Utd" or just "United". The club's website is even at manutd.com. Most people definitely refer to Manchester United by a shortened name. – PeeJay 19:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Inter_Milan/Archive_4&oldid=1136820116"