Talk:Istrianity

There is no such thing as Istrian nationalism

Hello there, the source regarding Istrian nationalism is questionable per WP:QUESTIONABLE as it is showing inaccurate data. For example number of Istrians in Istria County where it's written number of 233,000 (2002e) even the whole county had 203,304 of inhabitants per 2001 census. In that time there was only 8,865 people who declared themselves under regional affiliation. Also the county seat is not Pula, it is Pazin. Another remark is on the term Istrianess which I could not find anywhere else except in this wiki article. Opatijac97 (talk) 17:33, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough with Istrian nationalism, but notice that "Istrianess" is used in a few sources [1]. Although I'd agree that it is a minor term. Super Ψ Dro 19:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

It really is, I see now. Ok, if you want you can put it back. Opatijac97 (talk) 12:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Done. Now with sources. Super Ψ Dro 13:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

As mentioned already in a description, there indeed is no term like "Istrian nationalism". As already explained by @Opatijac97:, it is a questionable from a book that is already 20 years old. Istrians are a regional-declared people and not a nation. "Istrianess" seems to me like just another term for Istrianism. @Super Dromaeosaurus: In fact, I even believe that "Istrianess" is more used in English than the term "Istrianism". What do you think? --Koreanovsky (talk) 11:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Istrianism gets 29 results in Google Scholar while Istrianness and Istrianess get 23. Per WP:COMMONNAME, Istrianism is better here, and it is also consistent with Dalmatianism and other -isms in Europe or the world. Note that -ness may be seen as informal in Wikipedia, see Britishness (now a redirect). Super Ψ Dro 14:19, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I moved the article, as Istrianity gets 59 results in Google Scholar, and also provides more results in Google Books than the other terms, it seems to be the most common name. Super Ψ Dro 18:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Article's name

I am not sure that "Istrianity" is more common than "Istrianism" and I thus challenge this bold move. Even though "Istrian nationalism" is not be pejorative (think of several progressive regional natioalist movements in Europe), I agree that it would not be appropriate. What about the more encompassing "Istrian regionalism"? -- Checco (talk) 06:14, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Do you have any evidence that "Istrianity" is not the most common name? I've already provided Google Scholar searches. Furthermore, looking it up on Google Books generates five pages of results, vs. one by "Istrianness" and three by "Istrianism". "X regionalism" is an unorthodox title format in Wikipedia and I don't see why should we use a descriptive name when we have precise terms. But if you favor this option, feel free to start a WP:RM. Super Ψ Dro 11:06, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Surely, "Istrianism" is a much more common term than "Istrianity" (21,400 Google hits over 410). "Istrian regionalism" (1,780 hits) is of course a very orthodox, I would say regular, name for a Wikipedia article. This said, I think we should simply go back to the previous, established name, "Istrianity" and, of course, you would be free to start a requested move from the established name to the new one. Please keep in mind that, per Wikipedia:Consensus, "when discussions of proposals to add, modify, or remove material in articles end without consensus, the common result is to retain the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit" and, per Wikipedia:Be bold, "do not be upset if your bold edits get reverted". --Checco (talk) 12:08, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Of course the results are inflated for "Istrianism" after it was the title of a Wikipedia article for years. Removing Wikipedia and Wikipedia mirrors only gives 6 results for Istrianism [2] (removing Wikipedia results gives a similar 458 to Istrianity [3]). In any case Google results aren't usually taken that much in consideration when deciding common names as they're harder to use for deciding which term is more common, specially when dealing with terms with millions of results. Google Books and Scholar results are easier to control for this purpose.

Not sure what did you intend by bolding "you", I've already proven the title I've moved the article to is more appropriate per Wikipedia policy. And those two quotes aren't really related to this situation either. They feel like simply alluding to the rules for the sake of it. Just start a RM if you want the title changed to "Istrian regionalism". I'll probably not even participate on it. Super Ψ Dro 12:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Being honest here, I am not seeing much evidence that "Istrianity" is a more relevant article title than "Istrianism" (or Istrian regionalism), and consider that moving an article title unilaterally without a discussion first was a needlessly premature move.--Autospark (talk) 13:17, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Uhh. I am not opposed to "Istrian regionalism". But to say there is no evidence that "Istrianity" is more common than "Istrianism" is not looking at the evidence in front of you. Like really, I don't get it. I am not opposed to "Istrian regionalism". Do you want me to move the article back to "Istrianism" just so that I start a RM for "Istrianity"? I can do that, and out of the two it is "Istrianity" that is demonstrably more common, so the RM will pass. Do you intend to use that chance to discuss "Istrian regionalism"? Then you can just directly start a RM for that one. I don't really get the impracticality here, but tell me: what you want is for me to start a bureaucratic process to lead to the same conclusion or to a second different one that you can achieve yourself? Because I can, if you wish. Super Ψ Dro 18:06, 14 October 2024 (UTC)