Talk:Giorgia Meloni

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Giorgia Meloni 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

Archives: 1

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Italy High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in to an autoconfirmed or confirmed account (usually granted automatically to accounts with 10 edits and an age of 4 days)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Section sizes

Section size for Giorgia Meloni (30 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	6,017	6,017
Early life	9,396	19,200
Education and early political activism	9,804	9,804
Political career	24	62,410
Minister of Youth	7,263	7,263
Leader of Brothers of Italy	30,135	30,135
2022 Italian general election	24,988	24,988
Prime Minister of Italy	58	63,409
Government formation	14,834	14,834
Domestic policies	21,449	21,449
Constitutional reform	2,311	2,311
Foreign policy	24,757	24,757
Political positions	15,588	116,538
Social issues	19,250	19,250
Feminism	5,869	5,869
Immigration and multiculturalism	23,675	23,675
Foreign issues	22,162	22,162
COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines	4,047	4,047
Relationship with fascism	25,947	25,947
Personal life	10,291	10,291
Honours and recognition	2,881	4,152
Foreign honours	1,271	1,271
Electoral history	3,381	8,275
First-past-the-post elections	3,068	3,068
Municipal elections	1,826	1,826
Bibliography	1,025	1,025
See also	141	141
References	30	30
Further reading	343	343
External links	2,907	2,907
Total	294,738	294,738

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

September 25 to October 1, 2022

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Gabriele Di Donfrancesco (30 November 2022). "How the far-right is keeping Giorgia Meloni's Wikipedia page free of any ties to fascism". The Daily Dot. The difference is especially glaring when compared to the English, French, German and Spanish versions of the same articles.

Portrait 2

Wich picture should we do for the infobox?

C? Shadow4dark (talk) 08:31, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~I vote for a because b is shot of a YouTube video and lower quality. Shadow4dark (talk) 08:51, 23 December 2022 (UTC)~~ [reply]

Same, for a. Why is it even going for a poll ? Photo a is of a way better quality and from the same year, so the person hasn't changed. This isn't even up to debate, of course we're going to use the better quality pic. --Aréat (talk) 10:32, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To stop the edit war? Shadow4dark (talk) 11:29, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

B VosleCap (talk) 11:09, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I slightly prefer B, just because she looks more “institutional”. -- Nick.mon (talk) 13:15, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A As far as I can see, her appearance hasn't changed since Feb 2022, so let's use a photo that is of higher quality. --Vacant0 (talk) 14:42, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

B —Samuele1607 (talk) 13:21, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

picture B — as it looks more professional and above all it has a neutral background.Federpadel (talk) 21:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Option B looks more like an official portrait than option B. _-_Alsor (talk) 23:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Option B looks a bit more professional and has better contrast between the figure and the background. The crop could be improved however. Generalrelative (talk) 20:08, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The official portrait has been released on the government's website, so I think we should use it. -- Nick.mon (talk) 10:47, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support for official portrait (c). Shadow4dark (talk) 17:42, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the "Education and early political activism" section, in the third paragraph. The sentence "specialised in issuing professional diplomas for job titles such as chef, waiter, entertainer, tour guide, entertainer, hostess, depending on the course of studies chosen by the student." Entertainer is listed twice. Mrprotest (talk) 13:46, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 15:36, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Fascism

As of January 2024, she never associated herself with Anti-Fascism (sourced here). 176.200.93.83 (talk) 06:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Domestic partner: Milei?

The info box has Javier Milei listed as her domestic partner. Is this a troll? I can’t find a reference for this. 2603:7000:8901:6E8A:2194:97B9:731A:3C2E (talk) 11:13, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Never Ending Story

Please note that name of the young warrior is Atreyu and not Atreju like wrongly is written in text. Please correct it accordingly. 194.102.208.198 (talk) 08:36, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

done --FMSky (talk) 09:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correction to inaccurate language

I have made two minor changes. 1. She couldn't have paid a "state visit". Heads of state make state visits. Prime Ministers don't. She made an official visit. Text corrected. 2. She couldn't have been the first western head of state to visit as she isn't a head of state. She is prime minister, not president. Changed 'head of state' to 'leader'. She was the first western leader to visit, not head of state. Jtdirl (talk) 04:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Islamophobia

HumansRightsIsCool and JacktheBrown - We go by what RS say, not what we think is "biased" or "complex". You are wrong about a lack of the term Christophobia. The use of Islamophobia has been present in the lead for over 6 months ([1]) and is WP:STATUSQUO. You need to gain consensus for its removal. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:21, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i am not wrong about the word Christophobia. even though the term exists. no one uses it. when i was writing "Christophobia" auto correct corrected me multiple times but not when i write "islamophobia". that's proof lol. just like hinduphobia and sikhphobia, islamophobia is a nonsensical word. Islam is not a race nor sexual orientation. Any criticism of the set of beliefs known as a religion is not a form of bigotry and shouldn't have the word "phobic" next to it like "Homophobic" and other words. The use of Islamophobia has been present in the lead for over 6 months, true, but when it was first added, got reverted multiple times by @DisneyGuy744. also since you said "We go by what RS say" @JacktheBrown pointed out reliable sources say It's a very complex topic. reliable sources say this "phobia" is a direct consequence of the Islamists against Italy's Christian values. https://www.lastampa.it/milano/2025/01/03/video/insulti_allitalia_e_alla_polizia_durante_il_capodanno_in_piazza_duomo_a_milano-14917714/ HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 00:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

also the definition of the word "consensus" means a general agreement. don't think it's going to happen since we both presented our points in edit summaries, like how we don't label any islamic critics of christianity "christian phobic". yet you disagree with it. i don't wanna waste hours of my time like i do every time i enter a talk page, so i think i'm out of this conversation. anyone reading this who thinks "islamophobia" makes no sense at all, remove the word, wikipedia editors will get upset because they're all the same, but if you love your prime minister, president, or any one of your leaders these leftists are defaming, make sure to bring up the most logical points as possible like me. that's when they get upset or something. HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 00:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have great difficulty with WP:NPOV. If you cannot set aside your personal views when editing, then this is not the place for you. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPOV says "All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly and proportionately". that's what I've been doing. if Giorgia Meloni was African, and she was prime minister of an African country, or an Asian country, and she opposed multiculturalism and diversity and favored her culture which existed for hundreds or thousands of years, terms like "xenophobic" wouldn't be used on this article. only because she's white. and with "islamophobia", if it was the other way around and instead of being a catholic who's critical of Islam, instead she's a Muslim who criticizes Christianity and Christians, this article wouldn't say "christophobia". proof? the proof is that's never been used on an article about a Muslim. I've been representing fairly and proportionately like WP:NPOV says. and I'm stating my views because it's got to do with this article and the point of the talk page is to discuss about this article lol. technically they're not my "personal views" either because the definition of personal is "concerning one's private life, relationships, and emotions rather than one's public life". i make these views public because i have to fight biased leftist editing and make sure people follow wiki's policies. (SPOILER: THEY DONT) HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 06:38, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Claiming you have to fight biased leftist editing is veering into WP:RGW territory. Sarsenet (talk) 06:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV is about representing sources fairly and proportionately. It is not about trying to add WP:FALSEBALANCE or fight biased leftists. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HumansRightsIsCool, your concerns could lead to a very useful discussion and I thank you for this, but if you attack a political ideology your speech risks being weakened; for example, without "anyone reading this who thinks "islamophobia" makes no sense at all, remove the word, wikipedia editors will get upset because they're all the same, but if you love your prime minister, president, or any one of your leaders these leftists are defaming, make sure to bring up the most logical points as possible like me. that's when they get upset or something." your speech would have been great (when you become an expert user, you will understand that it's possible to express your thoughts without exaggerating). Thank you very much for your contribution, mine are advice. JacktheBrown (talk) 17:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Detail

In this article the Oxford comma has no coherence; it's sometimes used and sometimes not. Even if it's an unimportant issue, I think it's necessary to find a consensus regarding the use of the Oxford comma. Thanks to you all. JacktheBrown (talk) 20:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]