Talk:2014 Venetian independence referendum

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Venetian Republic (2014) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 03 May 2014 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into 2014 Venetian independence referendum. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Article's name

The article was moved many times over the weekend, thus I'm thinking twice before moving it again. The previous title (Venetian online referendum, 2014) reflected the online and unofficial nature of the referendum (of course promoters say the referendum is official and binding, but it's not what it is—for now, at least). Is thus Venetian status referendum, 2014 a viable title? Folks, let me know what you think. --Checco (talk) 10:14, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I rule out Venetian online status referendum, 2014 and Venetian online independence referendum, 2014 as too long and abstruse.

Apologies, I didn't realise it had been moved so many times before I did. The naming convention for referendums is "Demonym subject referendum, year", so the title must be "Venetian X referendum, 2014". The question is what is X. "Online" is incorrect, as that was not the subject of the referendum, merely the method. There is perhaps an argument that because there were several different questions, it could just be "Venetian referendum, 2014", as multi-question referendums forgoe the subject if they are on different topics (e.g. Georgian referendum, 2008). Number 5 7 07:55, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see your point. The main question of the referendum was independence (many voters did not bother to vote on the other issues and some were not allowed to, i.e. those who had not voted for candidates or, I guess, those who had said no to independence). I would thus stick to the "Venetian X referendum, 2014" option (one could propose "poll" instead of "referendum", but that's how it was named on the virtual ballot), but why did you chose "status" instead of "independence" (as in Scottish independence referendum, 2014)? And what about the informal and unofficial nature of the referendum? Thanks, --Checco (talk) 08:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I chose status as that is what is in the first sentence of the article, and on reflection, you may be right that independence is the better option. Number 5 7 09:07, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Please move the article accordingly and edit the intro as you please. Many thanks, --Checco (talk) 10:09, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A referendum is defined as: (in some countries synonymous with plebiscite — or a vote on a ballot question) a direct vote in which an entire electorate is asked to either accept or reject a particular proposal. This may result in the adoption of a new constitution, a constitutional amendment, or a law. The article examines a survey or opinion poll, and the article's name must be modified in this way. --Felisopus (talk) 11:45, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources disagree with you:

Venice prepares for referendum on secession from Italy

Venetians and people in the surrounding region have voted to split from Italy and establish an independent state in an unofficial referendum.

n case you missed it, Venetians said “Arrivederci, Roma” last week in an unofficial referendum on independence sponsored by Plebiscito.eu

It should be made clear that it was an unofficial referendum (which we have articles on elsewhere), but otherwise calling it a referendum is fine. Number 5 7 12:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your "reliable soruce" call it an online poll and unofficial referendum, all different things from a referendum. The other "source" is "reliable" and "informed" not even enough to explain that it's an online poll. That category contains official and legal referendum, not online surveys. I hope you understand the difference between newspaper headlines and legal elections. --Felisopus (talk) 12:44, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they do refer to it in other ways as well, but they also call it a referendum. I'm sorry if you think the Daily Telegraph isn't a reliable source, but you're welcome to bring it up at WP:RS noticeboard (although you will be laughed out of town). I also understand the different between an official and an unofficial referendum, but both are still referendums (as was this for example). Please also respect WP:BRD and get consensus for your changes before continuing to revert. Thanks, Number 5 7 12:57, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Venetian independence referendum, 2014 and Venetian independence poll, 2014: I'm fine with either of the two, but my slight preference goes to the first option as the initiative was identified primarily as "referendum" or "plebiscite" by its promoters and most journalists. --Checco (talk) 12:51, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would support both two proposals from Checco. It was an unofficial referendum, with no direct consequences out of political and cultural ones, but it was anyway some kind of referendum, not a poll; all the citizens were allowed to vote, they were informed, there was the chance to vote both by theirselves on line or inside polling places. The method and numbers can be controversial, but the fact that it was largely underestimated (when not ignored) by Italian press, is for sure not a problem of this referendum itself; I am glad to consider British press as a better source. If we want to talk about simple opinion polls, let's go to Diamanti's one, which anyway confirmed that the majority of Venetian people would support independence; but this is not the only, to show the same results, in last years.

--Filippo83 (talk) 13:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be bold and move the article to Venetian independence referendum, 2014. No-one questions that the referendum/poll was primarily on independence "yes or no" (other Wiki articles including "status" in their name usually refer to referenda with multiple options, eg. Puerto Rican status referendum, 2012). Of course, if other users will support Felisopus' point, we would always have the chance to move it again. --Checco (talk) 08:05, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposers and blatantly uninformed journalists can name it as they wish, this does not change its nature of an private unofficial online poll. Millions of people can call it an "election" or a "tree", but it is not. There are some other minor rules, like Wikipedia:NPOV or Wikipedia:CATEGORY, before reaching any consensus with biased statements. Also, statements about the article's name (incidentally I haven't moved it) does not provide reasons for other unmotivated rollbacks. In the same way, a private computer is still different from a ballot box, and personal statements such as "it was anyway some kind of referendum" don't add anything. --Felisopus (talk) 14:39, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was, in fact, a referendum, meaning that it was presented that way by its promoters and that it is consistent with the definition of referendum available in the pertaining article ("A referendum [...] is a direct vote in which an entire electorate is asked to either accept or reject a particular proposal"). The referendum was private, unofficiale and online, but was open to the entire Venetian electorate and so on. --Checco (talk) 08:05, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree with Venetian independence referendum, 2014 simply because it lends a sense of officialness to the event, when in reality the vote had no official consequences. I should think a title such as Venetian independence referendum, 2014 (unofficial) might be more appropriate. -- Necro Shea mo 00:39, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just here to say that a referendum is such when organized by an official authority. An online poll organized by private citizens is not a referendum. --87.17.224.77 (talk) 19:43, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Simply not true, as evidenced by the media references cited above. Number 5 7 21:14, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In view of the (this time real) referendum about autonomy measures in Veneto that is going to be held tomorrow, I think it is very important to move this page to a more useful title such as "Venetian indepencence online poll, 2014". I would actually support deletion of this page: many of these contents which would never find space in the Italian Wikipedia due to not being relevant, are included in the English version for unknown reasons. Manmatteo (talk) 17:35, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

POV

Total absence of all third-party independent analysis about the "results". --Felisopus (talk) 14:41, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(in Italian) La Stampa - Voti gonfiati al referendum veneto: “Un elettore su 10 collegato dal Cile”
(in Italian) Corriere del Veneto - Numeri falsi, i counter confermano: «Il 10 per cento dei voti dal Cile»
(in Italian) Il Fatto Quotidiano - Referendum Veneto, “150mila voti non 2 milioni”. Organizzatori attaccano: “Falso”
(in Italian) Corriere del Veneto - «Indipendenza, i numeri sono falsi»

Other sources say different things. However, I think it's quite important for the article to include a critique of the results and criticisms on the referendum itself, showing all the different views and data involved. Why don't you help improving the article? --Checco (talk) 08:05, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Felisopus. Totally POV. Someone must eliminate this article or at least we should not display the fake results. Barjimoa — Preceding undated comment added 16:56, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion polls results

The results of the opinion polls conducted while the referendum was still ongoing should not be presented in contrast with the criticism to the referendum results, as this criticism is based on data available after the referendum was completed and the reliable sources for the opinion polls don't establish this contrastive relationship. Presenting this contrast amounts to speculation on the validity of the criticism of the referendum results, which constitutes editorialization and possibly POV-pushing. According to MOS:OPED: "... editorializing can produce implications not supported by the sources. Words such as but, however, and although may imply a relationship between two statements where none exists, perhaps inappropriately undermining the first or giving undue precedence to the credibility of the second." 131.114.88.98 (talk) 15:25, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The opinion polls, especially that taken by Diamanti on the fifth day of polling, amount to speculation on the validity of the referendum results, indeed. Diamanti's poll certified that far more than a mere 3% of voters voted in the referendum. Of course none of these data are verified/verifiable and I agree that the section could be more problematic, but having a separate section for polls might led users into confusion. --Checco (talk) 20:00, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]