I just tried to put in a link to the FIMI page under charts. It should link to FIMI: Federation of the Italian music industry, but it doesn't. It doesn't on this page either, as you notice.

problem solved...maybe the case and colon or spacing was causing a problem. I redirected to Federation of the Italian music industry. It works.

Originally, I intended that extra page of festivals to be a place-holder and reminder to myself, so that I could write them up one by one and insert them into the festival section as separate "stubby" articles, as I did with the others. The list is still up (unlinked) at Italian music festivals. I still think it useful to have a longer list like that, but maybe it isn't Wikipedia policy.

(later) oops...I see that you just moved it over to the left under the main heading. I linked that to the list.

The regions are a problem. If I use my own page Music of Naples-- that I am currently working on--as a guide, I don't think I can cover all those areas in any reasonable length of time.

That Patchanka link is wrong, I think. It isn't folk music. I'm not sure that it is even a separate category of music. I know there is one album by that name. If it is now a "kind" of music, someone should do a stub on it. Jeffmatt 07:50, 21 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I notice that when the music box first went up, someone deleted "Genoa" because it is not a region. That is true, but neither is Naples or Venice. "Regione" in Italian corresponds to "state" and is an official administrative unit. I don't see anything wrong with using "Regional" in the English sense--meaning "area", so I am happy with the listings the way they are and shall try to fill some of them in over the course of the next few days. (In the meantime, I'll let the main article go for a while.) But--to cover the nitpickers, we could change "Regional sytles" to something totally hokey and wishy-washy, such as "Styles by area", "Music, area by area", etc. etc. I favor leaving it the way it is. Jeffmatt 18:02, 21 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree -- this is the English wikipedia, so we can logically use the English word "regional". I'll go ahead and restore regional, since that's the most logical descriptor. (you may also be interested in taking a look at list of cultural and regional genres of music -- there's a bunch of Italian cities listed there, all of which came from Wikipedia:Music encyclopedia topics) Tuf-Kat 02:13, 22 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And I've removed patchanka. Good luck on the regions. (you don't need to make them all as detailed as music of Naples, though that would certainly be great -- even just a couple paragraph overview of the most important bits can be useful). Tuf-Kat 02:19, 22 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now that I look at those items in the box, I see that we haven't included all the regions. (It's actually not a bad idea to make the English "region" correspond to the official Italian use of "regione" in this case.) I see one (Valle d'Aosta) that is missing; I'll put it in--an others, if necessary. Right now, I am just filling in a bit of history, places and events, venues, whatever is easiest--some external links. Not much in the way of "styles" as in "Regional styles"--that seems to me to be more of a "folk" concept. That's fine, too, but it'll have to get done at a later date. (OR: change the heading "Regional styles" to something else.) I'm indicating in the text of articles about cities (Naples, Rome, Venice) that these are city articles; then, I'm pointing to the article about the relevant region. It may be that we can delete Genoa again, and cover it in the region. Jeffmatt 06:44, 23 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm wondering if it is not a bad idea to load the Template:Infobox Region of Italy in the relevant pages of the regional aticles--not the whole box, just the map portion with the relevant region in red. I might try that if I get some energy. Or maybe not.Jeffmatt 07:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Out of curiosity, I need a geeked-down explanation of why the Valle d'Aosta link works fine from all the other regional articles, but from the main Music of Italy article opens to the discussion page and not the article. Jeffmatt 07:51, 23 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't see any problem... Circeus 17:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am in the process of filling in the red links with beautiful blue. Besides the regions, it makes sense to have four cities. Two are "done"...Venice ( expanded that one, but it's still sketchy) and Naples...and point to their respective regional articles (the one on Veneto is still in progress). The other two separate cities (with relevent point-to-region links) should be Rome (Lazio) and Milan (Lombardy). It'll take a day or two.Jeffmatt 17:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I think you don't need to double cat all the subdivisions (see WP:CAT).
• I can add an optional map if you want under the list of subdivisions too, if you want.
  • Done (see Music of Campania for an example), however, I do not believe this to be a good idea. It stretches the box too much.
• You need to bold the entire topic, not just the geographical name.
• Circeus 17:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, for consistency, I think you'll want to create articles for all regions. Circeus 18:12, 23 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I agree -- Wikipedia could and should have articles on every region and a goodly number of cities. What you've done so far looks quite good, maybe I'll see if I can help out a bit this weekend, just please cite your sources. I agree on not double-catting; being in Category:Music of Italian subdivisions means that the article is already Category:Italian music because the former is a subcategory of the latter. I could go either way on the maps, actually -- I read this talk page first and thought I wouldn't like the map, but it really didn't look too bad... I guess I still lean towards removing it because it makes the box long. Tuf-Kat 01:33, 24 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I don't like the idea of the map because in most cases, it'll stretch the articles. Besides, I think an article series box (because that's what Musicboxes really are) is hardly a place to put a map. Circeus 02:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I added a few more maps, but I'll cease and desist. I just got enthusiastic with my new-found ability to fiddle with music-boxes. (Uh...rimshot...that was a pun). Maybe the map does stretch the box too much. On the other hand, it doesn't hurt to show people where the region is. Maybe the simple region map as a photo at the top on the left.

Source citing. Well, so far there are no scholarly sources to cites. It's pretty much tourist book stuff--places and names. In any event, I'll keep it in mind. Thank you both for the comments and the work. Jeffmatt 06:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For now, I'll put in a single parenthetical bit of text to cite the only source I am using.) Jeffmatt 08:29, 24 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I deleted Genoa and will cover it in the region of Liguria. A few thoughts about the map:

I think I like the idea--for various reasons.

• (1) It's informative. I mean, I live here and even I didn't know where all those regions were until I started doing this. If a reader reads a sentence on the order of "due to location, there was influence from northern Europe" (or something like that), the eyes can just glance over and see;
• (2) an additional graphic resets the reader's attention span, which even Wikpedia says is down to about 12 seconds and fading fast!
• (3) a lengthened box doesn't bother me--it helps. Narrow columns of print are easier on the eye--easier to read--according to those who write about on-screen communication. Much of the text in Wikpedia is hard to read from that point of view.

In any event, I'm having fun and have no particular axe to grind. Do what you think is best. Jeffmatt 10:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

... of "Regional styles" to "Music by Region and city". I think it sounds better, but if anyone feels otherwise, feel free to change it back. (In which case, do it manually and not with the revert function or you might lose some of the new regions I put in.)Jeffmatt 18:56, 26 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All of the regions and four or five important cities are now all blue-linked. Most of the blue links are "done" (or at least useful, though they could use further expansion) and a few are only stubs, but I'll get to them....about 5 or 6 left to go. Jeffmatt 17:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looking really great! Tuf-Kat 00:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

....happens when you get in a hurry...or stop thinking...I screwed up the Emilia (-) Romagna page. I recall thinking how clumsy that hyphen looked since there are hyphens used to separate region from region. So, I sez...just take it out...without thinking what it would do to the artifically unintelligent links in the machine. (Just so you know, even Italians don't use that hyphen most of the time.) There are other regions in Italian like that, and they should all be unhyphenated. When I become emperor of the universe, I shall make it so. Sorry. Thank you for fixing it.

Three more to go in that box. "Regional scenes" is fine, except (1) there are also cities in there--so sooner or late you are going to want "City scenes", and (2) it sounds corny, but it's not really important. Jeffmatt 15:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"cities" form a regional scene too, as far as I'm concerned, but maybe that's just me. As far as the hyphens are concerned, by English wikipedia usage, we should use the same name as the region articles. There's actually been an edit war over the name for Trentino-South Tyrol. If the region article is at Emilia-Romagna, then the subarticl eought to be Music of Emilia-Romagna, even if many people don't use the hyphen. It's just a matter of consistency. Circeus 16:20, 29 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fine. No problems. Important is to turn out a good product. The edit war over Trentino-South Tyrol is, I bet (and I haven't looked at it) less to do with the hyphen than with the sturggle between Italian speakers, who want Alto Addige (the Upper Etsch river--which makes sense from the point of view of Rome) and some of the German speakers, who still prefer to call it Southern Tyrol, as if that part of Italy were still part of Greater Germany, as recalled in the text of the Deutscland Lied, that defines the Etsch as one of the borders of Germany. The poem starts "Deutschland, Deutschland über alles...." That has caused a few problems in the past, and I doubt if Wikipedia can solve that one.Jeffmatt 21:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think I saw it mentionned over at the Administrator's noticeboard. It referred to it as "Italian wikipedians trying to enforce italian wordings on teh English wikipedia". Circeus 22:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree that these articles should format region names the same as the main articles on those regions; I also agree that a city can be a region. While it could be regarded as more precise in one way or another to separate cities and "regions", that just seems more pedantic than useful. Tuf-Kat 01:43, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possibly. I wasn't trying to be pedantic. I was simply trying to put myself in the place of someone looking for information. What's the quickest way to find something if you're not sure whether the place is a village, town, city, province or region? Admittedly, that won't happen too often. Also, in terms of ease of looking at lists, two short lists are easier to scan than one longer list, even if alphabetical. It might start to be more important if you want to have articles on, say, ten other Italian cities. But... maybe it's 6 of one, half dozen of the other. It's fine the way it is. I can get the last two today: Lombardy and Milan---another region and regional capital with pointers in the lead of both.

Names of regions and cites are bit confusing since many different people have contributed various items--for example, file names for pictures. (The dot map for Florence was named "firenze" and so on. I haven't checked "Turin" / Torino" but there is bound to be inconsistency.

Thank you, Circeus, for cleaning up those items (even "preventive clean-up" ! Love it!) Jeffmatt 05:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don't mind the note in the template history that I restored or changed another hyphen (this one in Trentino-Alto Addige). I did, but I changed it back. I was concered because I couldn't the article that I was sure I had done. Apparently, I skipped it (but will get to it today).

Incidentally, the official Wikpedia English name seems to be Trentino-South Tyrol, a translation of the German name used by German speakers in that region. As long as there are adeqate redirects, does it matter?Jeffmatt 11:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At least the regions and the cities all have something longer than stubs in them. Obviously, they can use expansion. For example, most of them are missing separate sections on folk music, something that I might be able to get to, sooner or later-- but it would better if someone more knowledgeable about that area (that's 95% of the human race) jumped on board. Anyway, I'll turn my attention for a while to the Music Prizes in Italy. That should be a quickie.Jeffmatt 16:05, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]