Talk:Sicily/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

The physical diversity amongst Sicilian people needs to be mentioned. While it's true than many Sicilians (such as Messina-born actress Maria Grazia Cucinotta) possess the stereotypical raven hair, black eyes and deep olive skin associated with the island, there are those, such as Palermo-born model Eva Riccobono who is blonde-haired, blue-eyed, and very tall. The current Miss Italy is Sicilian and has red hair and grey eyes. Lots of people here in Sicily are light-eyed. However, the most common physical type I see here on a daily basis falls somewhere in between the two extremes. The hair is medium to dark brown, the eyes are a brownish green, and the skin is a pale olive that tans well in summer. My son and daughter are both of this phenotype. The people are also becoming taller than in previous generations. Perhaps the article could display pictures of various Sicilians showing this notable diversity?--jeanne (talk) 13:03, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

This article is about Sicily, not Sicilians. You might better include that content into a standalone article instead; replacing

reliable sources. --Angelo (talk

) 20:53, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation guide

We could use one. I'm just guessing that the native pronunciation is more like see-CHEE-lya /siˈtʃilja/ than the pronunciation most English speakers use.

Misha Vargas (talk) 07:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

the temple of selinunte aren't greece but they are "elimi" elimi were an ancient population more ancient than greece--217.201.41.236 (talk) 21:46, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

The temples of Selinunte were built by Greek colonists from the city of Megara Hyblaea, Greek colony of her mother Greek city Megara. Maybe you are thinking of the temple of Segesta that was built by Elymians that lived in Sicily but from unknown precise origins, possibly came from Anatolia (just to avoid you get more confused Anatolia=Turchia). Which population is more ancient? Neither of this two, they are about the same if the theory that the Elymians left Troy to move to Sicily after being defeated by the Greeks is true.

Selinunte was Greek, still is, and will always be.--Sal73x (talk) 00:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I believe the figures on the national origin of immigrants in Sicily is erroneous. There are far more Albanians and Ukranians present in Sicily than Sri Lankans. I live in Sicily, and Albanians make up a huge portion of the foreign population here.--jeanne (talk) 07:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Jeanne, I can see that you wrote in February 09 (seen your post only today) and I'm guessing that during this time the section "national origin of immigrants in Sicily" has been deleted. As far as I know there is a big comunity of asians (Sri Lankans and Pakistanis) in Palermo but as you were suggesting in the easter part of Sicily the easter Europeans (Albanians, Rumanians and Polish) are a considerable part of the foreign population. Also in the province of Ragusa there is a large number of north-Africans (Tunisians and Moroccans) that should be considered in the list. Ciao!--Sal73x (talk) 21:21, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

There are many Moroccans in the provinces of Catania and Messina as well, so they should be included.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:16, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

file under something ought to be mentioned about...

I was checking against because I seem to recall... seeing a documentary (Probably the Science Channel or National Geographic) which featured large (thousands of meters thick deposits that are now)

Messinian Salinity Crisis. (Note the name tie to the Strait of Messina.) //24.62.190.234 (talk

) 19:04, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Demographics

The demographics of section is completely Point of View especially in terms of relations with Greeks. In certain studies, it was shown that 37% of the Sicilian gene pool was Greek which is fine, but where the proof backing up this statement "the ethnicities outside of Italy itself some of the people associate with the Greeks, especially due to the Magna Græcia and Greco-Roman cultures; this is exemplified in the saying "una faccia, una razza" which means "one face, one race." How do we know this. The article that this was taken from (see here) [[1]] was someones point of view and does not reflect scientific study, not to mention it is very inaccurate. Here is a quote: "Southerly Italia was settled by Greek 2500 months ago." This is horrible grammar and does not represent a credible source for the above statments. If we can find a credable source for this statement, then it can stay. Galati (talk) 03:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)Galati.

The weather table from "the Sicily Site" contains all wrong data, while the source (see http://www.thesicilysite.com/Pages/sicily_weather.htm) contains correct information. I suggest to correct this table and also to put a link to a website that is especially devoted to weather in Sicily: www.weather-in-sicily.com, which draws its data from www.euroweather.net/italian/wxref; the weather stats it offers include monthly average high and low temperatures, precipitation and, in addition to "The Sicily Site", also relative humidity and daily hours of sunshine. Stefanogrillo (talk) 12:03, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

It should also be mentioned that the highest temperature of 48.5 °C (119.3 °F) in Europe was recorded in Catenanuova, Sicily, on August 10, 1999. I just added my suggestion to the climate chapter. Agitatov (talk) 20:05, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Does anybody here know which of the Earth’s

) 14:21, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

• 
  Shows Sicily as part of the Eurasian plate
• 
  Shows Sicily as part of the African plate

I replaced "The bridge" with "The planned bridge" because people skimming this article will think the bridge exists (as I did). Mike Young (talk) 10:38, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

In the "Ancient Tribes" section: Thoukydides (Histories, book VII, 6,2,2) says that Sicani came from Iberia. This Iberia of the classical and byzantine authors is approximately the todays Georgia in Caucasus. Do not confuse it with Iberica which is Spain and Portugal. Original Greek text here http://www.scribd.com/doc/30928260/thucydides6 See also

) 19:07, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Sıkılliye

= Arabic name of Sicily Böri (talk) 11:33, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi - I'm slightly puzzled by something expressed in the "Flora and Fauna" section: "....the DAMPENING of the climate lead to a decrease in rainfall and drying of rivers...". Surely a dampening of the climate would have the opposite effect...??? Does it perhaps mean "dampening" in the sense of "subduing" the activity of the climate? 82.3.144.140 (talk) 15:08, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm about to delete the introduction sentence that reads "The Sicilian economy is largely based on agriculture (mainly orange and lemon orchards); this same rural countryside has attracted significant tourism in the modern age" and insert "The Sicilian economy is well diversified. The Agriculture sector is relevant with citrus, olives and olive oil, grapes and wine. Tourism became an important sector for the island." My idea is based in the data from the article, that only 3,52% of the PIB comes from Agriculture, farming, fishing ("Dati Istat – Tavole regionali". Istat.it. http://www.istat.it/dati/dataset/20071004_00).

I'm open to suggestions.

) 22:23, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I personally like your version, but rather than just citrus, it should specify lemons and oranges, as the Sicilian countryside is dotted with these orchards. How about "The Sicilian economy is well diversified. The agriculture sector is significant with citrus fruits (mainly oranges and lemons), olives and olive oil, grapes and wine. Tourism and real estate are important sectors for the island."--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:22, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Alright Jeanne, thank you for the tip. Your version is better. I'll await a few days to make the update (with your contribution).

) 00:05, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I like Jeanne's sugestion. I think that it touches two important points that were wrong on the existing articol. 1) well diversified 2) agricolture yes but non only citrus. --Sal73x (talk) 14:29, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

@Hashem sfarim: Per

it is common that you explain the reason when adding material, not that I explain myself when reverting. But since you insist. In particular, formulation "Sicily is an autonomous region, ... it constitutes an autonomous region." in the lead is obviously duplicated, and does not flow well. Being an island and being an administrative region are two different and weakly connected notions, which should be in two different sentences.

Actually, per

, the whole lead is too short for an article of this size, and does not summarize the contents at all.

Generally, per

) 09:29, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I tend to agree with

No such user that putting the political nature of Sicily in the second sentence of the lead makes more sense, and provides for a better flow. Consistency is one value, but not the only value. Sicily has, in the human past, not been a part of Italy, but for at least the last 10,000 years or so it has always been the largest island in the Mediterranean Sea. Compare this lead with the lead sentences in the article on Sardinia. --Bejnar (talk

) 20:07, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

For completeness, since Hashem sfarim has not yet participated in this discussion on the talk page, I will point out that in making one of the edits to the lead Hashem sfarim wrote is not consistent with how other WP articles generally have other regions of Italy. --Bejnar (talk) 20:17, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I did give reasons, about CONSISTENCY with other WP articles. With Calabria, for example, you see "region of Italy" right in the opening sentence. But for some stupid reason, you have biased editors not doing that with Sicily, with the opening sentence. Just putting idiotically in the first sentence "largest island in Mediterranean" is (again I'll say it) NOT CONSISTENT with other WP articles with opening sentences, in the lede. So simply put, you're both wrong. The point is this though too. NoSuchUser has NO business reverting anything that is accurate, just because "he does not like it." (Or because he may think it's a bit redundant, which is debatable in a sense, but ignores the fact that basically every single other article on regions of Italy, have the words "region of Italy" in the very first sentence.) As to Bejnar's argument about Sicily not always being part of Sicily in the past, that argument is weak, for two reasons. 1) the article is about what it is NOW, and 2) many other sections of Italy were not technically part of "Italy" in the "past" either (if one knows the history). Yet they're still (in WP articles) in the very opening said to be "region of Italy." Putting "region of southern Italy" in the opening line is accurate, valid, sourced, and good-faith. WP policy and recommendation is NOT to revert. If one bothers to read the policy on this matter. And he's just plain wrong when he says that he's not required to give a reason for reverting. Uh, yeah, he does have to give a reason or "explain" according to WP policy and recommendation. But regardless, I DID give an explanation for that, and there's no valid reason to revert, simply because this perhaps biased editor "NoSuchUser" does not like it read that way. He does not own this article, yet in this matter he's acting as if he does. Not cool. Again, saying "region of southern Italy" is simply a fact, and is sourced...and I'll say it again...IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH OTHER WP ARTICLES...regarding regions of Italy articles. Case closed. Regards. Hashem sfarim (talk) 20:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I find no new arguments in the above comments by Hashem sfarim. Hashem sfarim seems to ignore the fact that the lead needs to be considered as a whole. Here, breaking the first sentence into two, makes it more readable, which is an importnt goal. --Bejnar (talk) 21:10, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Well then you're not looking carefully, because the "new argument" (for example) was one in addressing one of yours, about "not always part of Italy in the past". I refuted that argument reminding you that many other regions of Italy were not considered part of a unified whole until recently anyway. Number two, as far as "readability", that's just your opinion that it's not readable in saying it the way it is with "region of southern Italy" in the opening sentence. The point is saying it in the opening as well as "Medit Island" is not so "unreadable". Why should it be? It's accurate and is way more consistent with other regions of Italy is the point. Not that major a deal. But in principle not something that should be rudely reverted (with no explanation) at first, simply because of taste. Hashem sfarim (talk) 21:38, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

First, consistency is not the reason upon itself, but since you insist on it: Sardinia currently begins with Sardinia [...] is the second-largest island in the Mediterranean Sea [...]. It is an autonomous region of Italy,. Crete begins with Crete [...] is the largest and most populous of the Greek islands, [...] and one of the thirteen administrative regions of Greece.

Second, the difference between Sicily, Sardinia and other regions is that the islands are natural landforms which exist independently of human dwelling, while region borders are mostly arbitrary, man-made and changeable. I argue that it is not the same: Sicily is first and foremost an island. Since it happens to be part of Italy for the last 150 years, it is also an autonomous region of Italy

Semantics and philosophy aside, let's pay attention to the language and text flow, which you don't seem to do (as well as paying attention at edit summaries and talk page: I find your persistent references to "unexplained changes" insulting). You didn't even read the second sentence, so your lede reads "Sicily is an autonomous region, ... it constitutes an autonomous region." The catch is, we need to pack information that a) it's an island, b) makes an autonomous region with the minor islands, and it's difficult to do it in one sentence. So why insisting on one, when two will do the job better?

No such user (talk

) 08:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I did read the second sentence. A long time ago. And you're presumptuous to think I never did. And it doesn't matter though. And it doesn't really matter about Sardinia, because that's wrong too. And I knew about that already. And that's why I said GENERALLY consistent. Also, as I said before, it doesn't matter about 150 years ago, as it's dealing with what it is NOW. And it doesn't matter that it's an island, because that's not really the main issue as to Sicily being Italian or part of Italy. You know how many ignorant morons are in the world who think that Sicily is a separate country???? Too many. And putting an idiotic lede of only "largest island in Mediterranean", if they don't bother to read the second sentence (which many won't) will only tend to foster that ignoramus idiocy. Sicily is part of Italy, and that should be made clear RIGHT OFF THE BAT. Also, it's MORE consistent with how other regions of Italy are in WP articles. Also, again, you have NO business reverting an edit that is technically accurate and sourced, simply because you don't personally like it or have problems with it. According to WP policy and recommendation. I'm tired of this with you. For real. Hashem sfarim (talk) 13:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Just reading the article for the first time, it's not only about Sicily as it is now, more than half of it is perfectly applicable to Sicily 150 years ago or more. I agree with Bejnar and NSU.--GRuban (talk) 15:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Not mentioning the Mafia or crime in Sicily is about the same thing as not mentioning Hitler in a history of Germany. Those hard truths are not the definition of the region/culture or of the people who live there, but ignoring it, when it is already a cliche it is so well known, instead of owning it makes it appear as if the author of this article is hiding something and sugar-coating the story. Yes, there is a link, but should you not at least mention the main points of the Mafia article you link to so that random readers can understand the reasons for, the role of, and the extent of criminal activity and the cost to the local populace, that it isn't the majority involved but the majority affected? That's my opinion anyway.

95.211.149.152 (talk) 14:18, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Not sure to who is your message addressed but if you are able to write a paragraph that is obejctive ed that doesn't generalise on the topic I can't see why not. On the wiki.it there is a full paragraph and link to "Cosa Nostra" but the topic is not easy and would need to be treated carefully. Btw, don't you have an user name?--Sal73x (talk) 15:48, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree that the "Cosa Nostra" needs to be addressed at length considering it permeates every aspect of Sicilian society both overtly and covertly. After all the articles on Northern Ireland and its cities and towns devote large sections to The Troubles as it dominated life there for decades.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 19:03, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Haters!! What about Mexico? There section has nothing about their Mafia!! And thank god the Mighty White Anglo-Saxon's have no organized crime, just us evil Sicilians, the comments above show the childish, racist, tic-for-tac that Americans have, what a mean, bitter, hateful county we are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.236.229.173 (talk) 00:28, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Haters? The commenters above are merely suggesting that an article about Sicily ought to mention the Mafia, as it is relevant to the island's history and present and is a subject of general interest. Incidentally, the Mexico article has a whole section entitled "crime" which references the drug cartels and one of the comments above indicates that the articles on Northern Ireland have large sections dedicated to "The Troubles". While there is no evidence that the comments above are motivated by anti-Sicilian bigotry, your sarcastic reference to "Mighty White Anglo Saxons" is clearly bigoted (and irrational, since you have no knowledge of the commenters' ethnicity). CannotFindAName (talk) 20:37, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I am participating to a picture contest about Sicily:

http://www.alcart.it/?photo=foto-concorso-fotografico#

My pictures numbers are 56, 57 and 58. What do you think about it? In your opinion, can be interesting to add these pictures to this page?

Obviously, if you like my pictures, please vote them. ;)

--2.40.250.10 (talk) 06:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

• Most Jehovah's Witnesses in Sicily are Sicilians not Africans or eastern Europeans like the article claims.--Tatiana kitty 17:49, 4 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tatiana kitty (talk • contribs)

All of them are waiting for the Millenial Dawn that Russell predicted.

They think that they are the 144,000.

Tatiana, this has been improved now.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on

|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101127225428/http://oah.org/pubs/magazine/migrations/townsend.html to http://www.oah.org/pubs/magazine/migrations/townsend.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110420192801/http://www.virtuferries.com:80/index.aspx to http://www.virtuferries.com/index.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140820193826/http://www.greeknewsonline.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=3450 to http://www.greeknewsonline.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=3450
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100908090945/http://www.scuolasuperiorecatania.it:80/include/cambialingua.php?idpagina=1&lingua=2 to http://www.scuolasuperiorecatania.it/include/cambialingua.php?idpagina=1&lingua=2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080611235102/http://www.italianfoodforever.com:80/iff/articles.asp?id=55 to http://www.italianfoodforever.com/iff/articles.asp?id=55
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120206065746/http://www.ontoeurope.com/cities/2005/Catania/06-05index.html to http://www.ontoeurope.com/cities/2005/Catania/06-05index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018.

}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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. —

:Online 15:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)