Talk:Giorgia Meloni/Archive 1

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Giorgia Meloni. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110303201224/http://www.odg.roma.it/ricerca.php to http://www.odg.roma.it/ricerca.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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.

? A help request is open: true. Replace the reason with "helped" to mark as answered.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:23, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

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

Giorgia Meloni (born 15 January 1977) is an Italian woman, Christian, mother, leader of Brothers of Italy, a national conservative party in Italy. Meloni served also as Minister of Youth in Silvio Berlusconi's fourth government and president of Young Italy, the youth section of The People of Freedom. 128.194.114.70 (talk) 19:49, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: MOS:FIRST. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:19, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Giorgia Meloni's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "repubblica.it":

• From Sardinia: "Silenzio di piombo: le basi militari in Sardegna e quelle morti senza risposte". 1 March 2016.
• From The People of Freedom: Berlusconi annuncia ritorno di Forza Italia. "Temo che sarò ancora il numero uno". Repubblica.it (28 June 2013). Retrieved on 2013-08-24.
• From Centre-left coalition: Rubino, Monica, "Il governo Renzi ha giurato al Colle, è in carica. Gelo con Letta alla consegna della campanella", Repubblica.it
• From Centre-right coalition: Berlusconi annuncia ritorno di Forza Italia. "Temo che sarò ancora il numero uno". Repubblica.it (2013-06-28). Retrieved on 2013-08-24.
• From Paolo Gentiloni: "Pd, Gentiloni appoggia Zingaretti alla segreteria: "Coraggioso, è la maggiore novità"". la Repubblica. 15 November 2018. Retrieved 14 April 2019.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 17:10, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

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

change Franche to France Bruno.uy (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:26, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

This page is factually incorrect. Whoever wrote she is a fascist is a liar, and should be sued for false informations. The categorisation (bottom) of "Neo-Fascist" is a blatant lie and political attack. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.183.238.76 (talk) 01:50, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

You can start a discussion here on the talk page by suggesting what you think it should say. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:52, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

is it any surprise, that the leftwing lunatics who have ruined wikipedia have already slandered this subjec? WirmerFlagge (talk) 15:38, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

None of it is even cited, how is it allowed to be on the main page?Clarissacolgate (talk) 00:50, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah Wikipedia is really going crazy with this article. You aren't allowed to make edits but they also don't put the LOCK picture in the top right. So if you didn't know better you'd think this is what people actually believe. Whatever makes the people in power happy, I guess. 2600:4041:5801:400:1C55:F445:403:47C8 (talk) 19:02, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Read WP:LEADCITE. Everything that you see in the introduction is backed up by reliable sources that are located further down the article. The page was locked yesterday due to vandalism (see page history) and will stay protected until September 29. Vacant0 (talk) 19:09, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

"Reliable sources" are just billion dollar corporations that are all centrally controlled by the CIA and pump out propaganda designed to manufacture consent for war profiteering that kills mostly brown people. 2600:4041:5801:400:2407:1F63:BE9D:B6C7 (talk) 19:25, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

What sources do you think are reliable then? Vacant0 (talk) 19:28, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

it's not what alternatives are reliable that is the issue, but that what is deemed reliable can say any nonsense and the wikipedia leftist edit warriors will accept it ... and use editorial hierarchies to block any attempt to qualify or contextualize the characterization of the subject by these corporatist mouthpieces. wikipedia's ethical standards are laughable. WirmerFlagge (talk) 15:48, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

"wikipedia's ethical standards are laughable because they don't precisely align with my political views". i fixed that for you. johnnycat (talk) 06:09, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

typical. lazy, revealing, self-referential. but, typical. somebody get this cat a mirror. fixed it for you WirmerFlagge (talk) 19:49, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Meloni described …

Meloni self-described …

In what universe is “self-described” more precise, more clear, or in any other way an improvement on “described”? 143.59.33.8 (talk) 12:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

"Described" means someone else said it about it. "Self-described" means she said it about herself. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 01:10, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

She said what about herself? 2600:4041:5801:400:1C55:F445:403:47C8 (talk) 18:45, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

at least they've given her that courtesy. most of the subjects the edit mafia on wikipedia hate are just labelled racist, transphobe, etc etc etc ad nauseum, and any attempt to provide the subject's own description of themselves is undone, or targeted, or brigaded to death. WirmerFlagge (talk) 15:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Do not adding or nominating her without official sources from {https://www.governo.it/it/il-presidente} Raden Maksim (talk) 10:15, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

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

This page is full of assumptions and adjectives that go beyond fact. This is propaganda, not knowledge. To repeat whatever criticisms and opinions have been voiced against anyone, in a falsely 'neutral' way, is simply the amplification of a smear campaign.

To say that she "has been described" or "has been accused", is not verified fact against the subject of the description or accusation - it's only fact in respect to the accusers.

The article itself looks more like the minutes for a prosecution. Unacceptable, because Wikipaedia should deal with fact - not opinion - but also not make politics. This is a knowledge base - not a tribune.

As usual, things become more clear if we reverse them: a similar article against any left-wing politician, with political accusations of equivalent nature, would be deemed as "fascist" and intolerable and immediately censored! Antenato (talk) 10:57, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Yakme (talk) 11:03, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

typical. wikipedia is dead. the far left corporate, globalist, groomer edit mafia have won. WirmerFlagge (talk) 15:42, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

"far left" "corporate" ... pick one — seriously though, please read WP:PERSONALATTACKS and WP:RELIABLESOURCES. Davide King (talk) 19:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

are you seriously implying a division between far-left politics and the corporate oligarchs? "you'll own nothing and like it"? "climate change is the biggest threat to our world"? "white men are the biggest threat to our country"? "pride"! are you living in a world we've discovered? and, david, a personal attack requires a person ... who was ... wait for it ... attacked. you're welcome, genius. WirmerFlagge (talk) 19:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

sorry ... davidE? didn't mean to misgender you. WirmerFlagge (talk) 19:56, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm not a transgender, I'm just a *gasp* foreigner to you (Davide is the Italian for David). There's no point further discussing this with you, as you appear to know nothing about political science, confuse the centre-left for the far-left, and don't appear to realize it's the centre-left that moved to the right since the 1970s as the Neoliberal (Counter-)Revolution took hold. "you'll own nothing and like it" Just like our existing society, "private property is already done away for a large of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of the rest of population" (semi-quote), and if you meant houses, there are still millions who don't have it, but you probably think this ain't "real capitalism". And as for personal attacks, what do you think "edit mafia" referred to? To Wikipedia editors, who may come as a shock to you but they're people too. Going back to the subject of this article, the New York Post, The Sun, and the Washington Examiner have all described Meloni as far right. Are they far left too? Davide King (talk) 12:15, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Citation need for the lines ‘ She has expressed controversial views, such as praising Italian dictator Benito Mussolini in 1996 and Nazi collaborator and co-founder of MSI Giorgio Almirante in 2020.’ Unless this is already cited before the text it needs it to keep up to the neutrality standards Wikipedia says to set. 216.150.112.139 (talk) 23:44, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Citations are not always included in the lede in cases where it summarises information that is included (with citations) later in the article. Check citations 132 and 133. TWM03 (talk) 08:38, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Read MOS:LEADCITE. Vacant0 (talk) 10:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Are we done with backing up our articles with citations now? Is that a thing of the past? 2600:6C5E:5D7F:F073:D103:3F5F:F549:F7E (talk) 02:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Read MOS:LEADCITE. Vacant0 (talk) 10:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

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

She has been elected Prime Minister of Italy and yet the page does not provide this information Adams334 (talk) 14:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done – she has not been elected PM. Yakme (talk) 14:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

yes she has WirmerFlagge (talk) 15:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

"Should Meloni succeed in her quest to form a government, she will likely take the reins of prime minister in October."

From https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/foreign/italys-far-right-giorgia-meloni-first-female-pm 51.6.122.18 (talk) 10:36, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

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

The second paragraph under "Personal Life" is unfounded speculation, and all sentences in the paragraph are cited from a single notoriously biased source with a single author (citation #163). They do not belong on this wiki, please delete that entire paragraph. The clear attempt of the author is slight the subject, which is not in line with wikipedia's objectives of fair and unbiased knowledge gathering, and should serve as grounds for limiting or monitoring that contributor's future attempts at editing articles. Dyno99 (talk) 15:06, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done – I boldly removed that paragraph. Indeed it was sort of useless to point out her literary preferences. Yakme (talk) 16:05, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

This entire page should be put under review for political bias. Has any actual Italian speaker reviewed this at all? It's insane.

1. As said many times before, there are no sources

2. Take a look at her ITALIAN Wikipedia page. It provides an unbiased and very neutral descripion of her with a much fairer section titled "political ideas" where they discuss her right wing views.

Hopefully this gets taken seriously because from my perspective the current article is fully written by one of her opponents on a bad day.

In the 4 years of my politics degree I never encountered a more biased page about any political figure. The entire page is, even if you don't know who she is, CLEARLY written by someone who hates her and wants to make every single possible fascist association and connection extremely evident. You have to recognise that it is bias. All of this should be condensed inside a "fascism associations/controversy/whatever" section. Even the personal life section is half dedicated to something about a fascist slogan. The political points made at every possible turn (almost literally in every sentence) should be restricted to one section. This page mentions fascism more than Mussolini's page. - I dread to think the misrepresentations I may have learned from pages about other foreign political figures. Wilpy590 (talk) 17:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

1. This page has 162 sources.

2. This page mentions "fascism" or "fascist" 10 times, and Benito Mussolini's page mentions "fascism" or "fascist" 155 times.

You are more likely to be taken seriously if you make your points specific and do not make wildly false assertions like these, or make personal attacks against editors as you did when you stated that the article was "written by someone who hates her". TWM03 (talk) 18:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

• This page has been mostly edited by Italians through out the recent period.
• This page lists 162 references. If you're talking about the introduction, read MOS:LEADCITE. I've already pointed this out to several users above.
• The Italian page is tagged for neutrality, meaning that it is biased towards certain viewpoints.

Vacant0 (talk) 18:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

yes it should. i agree. but, it is unlikely. because wikipedia is controlled by, guess what, a political agenda, designed to further the globalist destruction of family, nation, and rights. WirmerFlagge (talk) 20:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

The Italian article also calls her a fascist, lists her fascist ideas, lists her fascist friends, and talks of her love for conspiracy theories, so if you want to use that as the standard for the English article, I can support it. Cdjp1 (talk) 21:28, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

It's no secret that Meloni was a member of a full-blown neo-fascist party, and has praised Mussolini, Nazi collaborators, and the most virulent members of the MSI. However, while multiple sources describe her as still being a neo-fascist, would it be appropriate to categorize her as a fascist ruler? She would still preside over a government that is constitutionally liberal democratic, even if her sympathies lay with a more classically fascist system.

Personally, I'm up to adding the category of "Fascist rulers" to her, and I think that her own personal ideology is more important than the type of regime she leads, but I'm open to hearing debate on this. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 17:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

In my opinion this would only be appropriate if the substantial majority of reliable sources describe her as being a fascist at the time she is (will be) in power. We should leave it up to them to decide whether her own ideology or the type of regime she leads is more important. As of now I see a variety of descriptors used including "far-right", "hard-right", "right-wing populist" to describe her current positions, and not enough consensus to describe her as a fascist ruler. TWM03 (talk) 17:56, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

We should wait. If reliable sources in future tend to acknowledge her as "fascist"/"fascist ruler" etc. then I'd recommend to launch a RfC to reach a consensus for the inclusion of the category in the article. Vacant0 (talk) 18:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Sure, so long as her regime is characterised by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy. :) 78.146.243.73 (talk) 21:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Who knows, maybe she will be? Regardless, it's important to note that us editors aren't the judge of such descriptions, reliable sources and scholarly consensus are. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 22:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

I suggest we immediately describe Meloni as a fascist in this wikipedia article.

Firstly, she has expressed her support for the mass murderer Mussolini, who is also known as the father of fascism.

Secondly, she is opposed to anarchism, democracy, pluralism, liberalism, socialism, communism, the LGBTA community and marxism, which further supports the fact that she is a fascist... AlbrechtVonWallenstein (talk) 16:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

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

Once again, the second paragraph under Personal Life appears, after it was deleted this morning for clear irrelevance and bias. The citations have changed slightly but are still referring to a single author from a single notoriously biased source, whose clear intent is slander. This paragraph should be removed (again), it does not belong on a factually-based knowledge sharing site. It would appear that the author has editing rights, and I would again suggest that those rights be revoked or monitored, otherwise he will keep reintroducing his irrelevant and subjective content about fantasy fiction. Dyno99 (talk) 03:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

How exactly it is biased? You guys cry bias for anything, now for her literature preferences, which WP:RS (no matter that you think are unreliable or "biased") linked to her politics. I hope for copy editing and further improvement but it seems relevant to her politics and the New York Times piece has since received secondary coverage. I say we should follow WP:PRESERVE for now and try to improve it rather than remove it outright. Davide King (talk) 08:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

It's biased because it's sourced from a single person writing for a single publication, who has cobbled together a debasing allegation that he's assigning to a political realm in order to make it look ridiculous and based in fantasy. Taking a couple disparate alleged quotes and gluing them together with the author's inventions of motive doesn't make it anywhere near credible, quite the opposite, and viewers shouldn't have to read hearsay presented as general knowledge. The secondary coverage is still just referring to the single author, and it is objectively tabloid and politically motivated. I recommend that the wikipedia article just stick closer to common fact, as it does for most Personal Life sections, and ditch the fantasy fiction drivel. Dyno99 (talk) 11:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

It no longer is, as it is also mentioned by Agence France-Presse (AFP). Both AFP and The New York Times are considered WP:RELIABLESOURCES. Even the New York Post and The Sun (actual tabloids) have described her as far right — are they biased too for you? Davide King (talk) 11:13, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

It would appear you're focusing on the reference I made to the secondary coverage still just referring to the single author as a basis for the entire allegation about fantasy fiction. You can read it yourself. I'm not commenting on what publications in the world should be labelled tabloid, nor did I mention anything about the label "far right". I'll say it again, the fantasy fiction hearsay and slander does not belong on this wiki. Dyno99 (talk) 11:32, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

I will try to give you a better answer and address your issues. I don't know who added this in the first place, I added the AFP ref — I think the person who added and edited it in the first place would give a better answer because I still do not see where the issue is. How is it hearsay and slander? It was published by reliable sources, which linked it to her politics as stated below by TWM03, and I see no WP:VERIFY issues. So what that it was written by a single author?

There is no requirement that every article must be written by more than one author, so what it changed if it was written two or more authors? It needs to be published in a reliable source, sometimes the publisher matter more, other times the author matter more but in this case everything is fine — published by a reputable source and written by a journalist who has extensively covered Italy and other Southern European countries, not a politician or an op-ed. Many other articles also includes things about a politician's personal life that are relevant to their politics or career, not someone's favourite stuff, which truly does not belong on this wiki. There must be a link, which in this case I think reliable sources have provided. Davide King (talk) 20:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate your continued dialog. I am earnestly following up to represent my points, not trying to squabble. It's hearsay because you've got one person alleging quotes from the subject, and then assigning motive to those alleged quotes. Hearsay is "the report of another person's words by a witness", which is further exacerbated by this guy's sheer speculation about intent. It's all him saying I heard her say 'this' and she meant 'this'. Hearsay. That doesn't belong on here, his dislike for the subject is quite clear, he's not interested in a neutral encyclopedia. And it's biased in the same vein, you've got one single person making sweeping allegations, that's inherently biased to that one person. The slander is plain as day... rather ask the question, how is this not slander. Dyno99 (talk) 22:13, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

The concept of hearsay does not apply when the person who said the thing is the person the statement is being made about. In order for the statement to be libelous or slanderous it would have to be false. TWM03 (talk) 22:25, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

It is absolutely false that Giorgia Meloni herself would support the statements made in this section, which are absolutely libelous as they undermine and belittle the subject. "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." What you have is a single person, alleging quotes from the subject that in all likelihood cannot be verified, but regardless, do not in and of themselves make the statements that are written in the personal life section. They have been used out of context in statements created by the author, and only the author. This is in violation of BPL policies, clearly. Dyno99 (talk) 01:15, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I have removed the "sacred text" quote (not sure if this is even what you were talking about) because I cannot find it attributed to Meloni. The other quote about Tolkien knowing what conservatives believe in stays because it is reported in a reliable source and I see no reason to believe she did not really say it. TWM03 (talk) 12:51, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. What about removing the fourth and fifth sentences in that paragraph that go into the alleged historical association between fantasy and a political group? They don't have anything to do with Meloni directly, so why is that in her Personal Life. If someone wanted to create a WP article on the connection there, surely they are free to do so, but doesn't seem like that historical theorizing about a political party belongs in someone's, anyone's, Personal Life section. Dyno99 (talk) 14:06, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Agreed that these statements are irrelevant for the section (and I don't think the first one is even stated in the source). I'll remove both for now. TWM03 (talk) 17:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

It's not a big deal removing that, my issue was removing it outright, but that part is sourced in the AFP piece and what is dismissed as allegation is in fact from a researcher of fascism and the far right. Just to clarify. Davide King (talk) 18:19, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks to TWM03 for having given you a much more concise answer than I ever could. It appears that the problem is you don't like the author and the piece, which is really not a good reason to remove sourced information. As I said, the author is a qualified and respected journalist who has been covering Italy and the region for many years, was published in a reliable source that has editorial standards and factchecking to verify what was said in the article, and was additionally covered by at least another reliable source. If there was anything that was actually "libelous or slanderous", or false, rest assued they would issue retractions. Davide King (talk) 11:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done as there are multiple reliable sources linking this to her politics, and I see no evidence that the intent of the articles is to slander her. A disagreement over what content should be in an article is not a reason for someone's editing rights to be removed. TWM03 (talk) 08:39, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

you are misunderstanding wikipedia's definition of "reliable source." it simply means whatever furthers the leftist corporate agenda and shows sufficient obeisance to the so-called protected classes the edit mafia represent. WirmerFlagge (talk) 20:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Again, "leftist" "corporate" – make up your mind. I think WP:RELIABLESOURCES and WP:NEWSORG is pretty clear — "that a news organization engages in fact-checking and has a reputation for accuracy are the publication of corrections and disclosures of conflicts of interest", which The New York Times, no matter how you may think is biased, qualifies. If you think "mainstream media" is "fake news", I don't know what to tell you and is pointless to discuss this any further. I'm trying to assume good faith, but if you are not here to build an encyclopedia, you should at least stop making personal attacks and slander our community. Davide King (talk) 20:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

If you want to only work on an online encyclopedia that only aligns with right-wing ideas while ignoring what is published, Conservapedia exists. Cdjp1 (talk) 21:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

A full paragraph on this is clearly WP:UNDUE. Why is this information relevant? And why is it put in "Personal life"? Ovinus (talk) 06:30, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree that it could be trimmed down. I think it is relevant because reliable sources have covered it and linked it to what Meloni is known for (her politics), though over time this may become irrelevant in comparison to other more important things. Where should it be put if not under "personal life"? TWM03 (talk) 10:58, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm out of the loop on this topic, but did some spotchecks. The article currently states, "Meloni opposes abortion, euthanasia, and laws that recognize same-sex marriage or civil unions." It's sourced to this, which says, Known for her strongly nationalist and anti-immigrant views as well as opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage, Brothers of Italy (Fratelli d’Italia, or FdI) leader Giorgia Meloni .... Okay. But NYT says, Asked about the law, Ms. Meloni, who has said her mother nearly aborted her, vowed in an interview that she “wouldn’t change it” as prime minister, and that abortion would remain “accessible and safe and legal.” But she added that she wanted to more fully apply a part of the law “about prevention,” which, she said, had been effectively ignored until now (). Thus the unqualified statement that she "opposes abortion" is false. The opposition to civil unions is also apparently untrue. (NYT) describes her opposition to adoption by gay couples, but says: Ms. Meloni has said that civil unions are good enough for gay couples.

It's worrying to see these kinds of factual errors on a BLP; if anyone else would like to check through the references I would appreciate it. Ovinus (talk) 06:26, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I think that was because the the part about her social views was written some time ago and the two sources you've added were published those days. I've since added them. Davide King (talk) 13:10, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Ovinus In the regions led by Meloni's party (Fdl), there have been incessant attempts to obstruct the full application of the law, which guarantees the right of abortion. For example the region of Marche (run by Meloni's party and which Meloni praised as a "model to follow") refused to adopt the guidelines of the Ministry of Health for the use of the RU486 abortion pill. So clearly she doesn't support "abortion" as explained in different articles below. Can she overturn a right voted by the majority of Italians in 1974? She can't (see Referendums in Italy). This doesn't mean she supports abortion, she is against it and she is trying in the regions where her party governs, to undermine this right.

Sources:

https://www.fanpage.it/politica/meloni-spiega-qual-e-la-posizione-di-fratelli-ditalia-sullaborto-ma-il-caso-marche-la-smentisce/

https://www.editorialedomani.it/politica/italia/quali-sono-le-posizioni-di-giorgia-meloni-aborto-natalita-nascite-yg3ezi8x

Also she is opposed to gay civil unions, she said it in many interview. She was a fierce critic of the law:

https://www.facebook.com/giorgiameloni.paginaufficiale/photos/a.343277597644/10154128020182645/?type=3

https://www.radioradicale.it/scheda/463566/intervista-a-giorgia-meloni-sul-disegno-di-legge-cirinna-sulle-unioni-civili

The sentence you have mentioned from the NYT (Ms. Meloni has said that civil unions are good enough for gay couples) actually is from an argument during one of her electoral rally, when an LGBT activist challenged Meloni about gay rights and Meloni said that she has a different opinion about it and with a rather patronising tone, she said to the activist "You have already the civil unions" (like it was a concession), which clearly she doesn't approve and in the past she said many times she wanted to have a popular referendum about this topic!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xFU3ptgCoM

Then, her opposition to civil unions is NOT apparently untrue. So, no 'dubious claims' as you write. 79.66.217.217 (talk) 22:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

FYI, there’s a discussion about this article happening at the Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboard. See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Giorgia Meloni. Anythingyouwant (talk) 15:07, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

@Davide King:, I changed your wikilink edit because it's not clear from the quote from the NY Times article ("the genre of fantasy in Italy has always been cultivated by the right") whether Croppi is referring to just the far right or the right in general. It's clear that the far right uses these camps to indoctrinate the youth, but the "fantasy" may extend to the entire right spectrum. Morbidthoughts (talk) 22:12, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

No problem. Perhaps we may also add the quote from an expert. AFP says: "Meloni's frequent references to The Lord of the Rings are no surprise for Paolo Heywood, an anthropologist at Durham University who has researched Italy's fascist movements. Far-right movements around the world 'have always been fascinated by the images of manly Nordic heroes found in Tolkien's work', he explained. In the case of Italy's far right, the fascination dates back to the early 1970s, following the publication of a first translation of The Lord of the Rings, prefaced by the philosopher and scholar of mysticism Elémire Zolla." Davide King (talk) 22:58, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

There may be some synthesis, but it's clear that Croppi refers to the far-right as just the right. No surprise since he was one of the founders of the camp. I do not object to adding a shortened version of your proposal. Morbidthoughts (talk) 01:59, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

"... it's clear that Croppi refers to the far-right as just the right." I'm not sure I understand what you're saying but that's why I used 'far-right' because he is/was far-right and so 'the right', while it could also refer in more broad terms, I understood it to mean 'far-right', that's why I used that link but it's not a big deal. As for the rest, if you have any preferred wording or suggestion for that little addition, I'd be happy to work it out with you. :-) Davide King (talk) 02:07, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

I meant that extremists (whether it's fascists or nazis) never see themselves as extremists. It may just be simpler to reinstate your interpretation than add more text. Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:23, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, that’s what I thought too. I will work on it. By the way, The New York Times referred to the folk band as “extremist”, AFP as “far-right”, and Le Monde as “neo-fascist”. Davide King (talk) 02:40, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

@Morbidthoughts, thoughts about this? No pun intended. Davide King (talk) 13:11, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the "As with the worldwide far-right" portion. The articles focus on what had happened in Italy, and the fantasy aspect is already a surprise to an uninformed reader outside Italy. What quotes support that this is a world-wide phenomenon? Morbidthoughts (talk) 16:31, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

It's from the quote I cited above. "Meloni's frequent references to The Lord of the Rings are no surprise for Paolo Heywood, an anthropologist at Durham University who has researched Italy's fascist movements. Far-right movements around the world 'have always been fascinated by the images of manly Nordic heroes found in Tolkien's work'." It put in a global context and seems relevant to me. Davide King (talk) 17:14, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't read that the same way to conclude the far right in general traditionally associate themselves with fantasy. It is true that the far-right values or appreciates the Nordic archetype but the Italian examples go beyond that. Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:47, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

What wording would you suggest? Or maybe we should just return with the previous version, without my latest addition but using 'Italian far-right'? Davide King (talk) 01:05, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

The previous version is fine. The focus should be on Meloni rather than some commentary on the worldwide far right. Morbidthoughts (talk) 07:26, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Is there any proof she is a member of the aspen institute? The sources are dubious and she is not listed as a member on their website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Famaja (talk • contribs) 18:51, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed it as you can see she is not a listed member https://www.aspeninstitute.org/programs/society-of-fellows/sof-members/ Famaja (talk) 19:11, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

La Repubblica is not a dubious sources, and neither are the other sources just because they're in Italian, and she is listed as socia. Perhaps member is not a goot translation for that (a literally translation is 'partner') but she has associated with them since February 2021. Davide King (talk) 19:54, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

That’s just hearsay though there’s no official confirmation she’s a member, partner etc on any of the institutes official websites, that article claims she listed as a member yet does not provide proof. Famaja (talk) 21:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

It’s possible she was invited to join yes, there is no proof she is an official member or partner. Famaja (talk) 21:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

What do you think reliable source do? They verify their sources and get their fact straight. La Repubblica is a newspaper of record, and was also reported in other sources, and unless they have since retracted this fact or other reliable sources show it was false, I don't see why it should be removed. It's also relevant as it's made up of people and ideals she abhorred, as noted in the sources, and is thus relevant to her political changes and moderation. Davide King (talk) 21:26, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

It’s not unusual for even mainstream papers to get facts wrong it happens very often,I think if the next prime minister of Italy was a member of the aspen institute it would be all over the internet but the only evidence is a few newspapers not substantiating anything. I wouldn’t be satisfied unless she’s listed as a member/partner on one of their official websites. Maybe you’re right but it’s not confirmed. Famaja (talk) 22:15, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps she joined in February 2021 but left or she joined as socia but is not a full, official member. Perhaps she's one of those 5 'Anonymous'. Or the Aspen Institute simply doesn't put all its members, after all there's an asterix after 'Current Members'. Either way, I see no reason why this wouldn't be true or why several reliable sources would've got this basic fact wrong. Unless other reliable sources say she's not a member or that those sources got it wrong, I see no reason why it wouldn't be enough it was published by reliable sources. Davide King (talk) 22:47, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I found two more refs, this time in English, one of them being from the Atlantic Council.12 Davide King (talk) 23:30, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Maybe you’re right I just find the lack of official conformation strange. Famaja (talk) 00:41, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

She praised Mussolini when she was 19. At that time she was a teenager per dictionaries which say it’s 13 to 19 inclusive. This is confirmed explicitly by this headline. So this edit summary is mistaken. Pinging User talk:79.66.217.217. Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

When did she use this slogan? It was Salvini's slogan in previous elections, not Meloni's. The Deutsche Welle's article cited is full of fake news... Thrawn79 (talk) 08:28, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I find quite bizarre your comment. Giorgia Meloni's speeches are full of "Italy and Italian first". Just yesterday the Guardian published an article in which Meloni says "she will put Italy first".

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/01/giorgia-meloni-says-she-will-put-italy-first-in-tackling-high-energy-costs 79.66.217.217 (talk) 13:33, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

It's not her slogan at all so my comment has nothing bizarre, and the deutsche welle article describes her politics as "pure populism", this says a lot on its political neutrality... Thrawn79 (talk) 19:33, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Have you even been following her campaign? And "pure populism" is just a subheader. If you mean the official campaign slogan was Pronti a risollevare l'Italia ("Ready to Revive Italy"), we aren't saying "Italy and Italians first" was her official campaign slogan but that some of ever policies were justified by that, just like the article linked above by the IP where she says she will put Italy first for the energy crisis. Besides, we use the same source to say she campaigned for lower taxes and less bureaucracy, and you don't seem to have a problem with that. Davide King (talk) 19:21, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

"Italy and Italians first!" was NEVER a slogan used by Giorgia Meloni or her party, the fact she said "she will put Italy first" in some her speeches doesn't mean that is a slogan, I don't understand why you keep defending an error made by a german journal and don't want to correct it yourself...

P.S. You are italian too so you know that actually Prima gli Italiani ("Italians first") was Salvini and Lega's slogan in past elections. Thrawn79 (talk) 15:58, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

I corrected this but it seems someone doesn't understand... Thrawn79 (talk) 18:35, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

We follow what reliable sources says and Salvini has no copyright about the slogan. Davide King (talk) 18:15, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

If you follow "reliable" sources like a robot without verifying, and refuse to correct errors, the article isn't reliable anymore. Thrawn79 (talk) 14:54, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Different politicians can use the same campaign slogan, this is not unique to Italy - and this slogan isn't exactly specific (lots of countries have politicians/potential officeholders running on "X first" slogans). This all seems a non-issue. QueenofBithynia (talk) 15:04, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

The fact is Meloni didn't use it, just what I'm trying to specify... Thrawn79 (talk) 15:09, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

There was no need to verify because I heard that same quote from the horse's mouth, so the source was correct. Anyway, even though I agree with QueenofBithynia that this is a non-issue, I've changed it to "saying she would put national interests first", happy? Davide King (talk) 15:16, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

A quote isn't a slogan, that's it. Anyways I didn't intend to start a polemic but just to signal that imprecision, I'm happy that it was corrected. Thrawn79 (talk) 17:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Giorgia Meloni Premier (cropped).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:08, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

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

"Segre said that her and Almirante are incompatible...."

change "her" to "she" 144REL144 (talk) 16:30, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Looks like this is fixed now. RudolfRed (talk) 23:05, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Giorgia Meloni 1995.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:08, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Giorgia Meloni Official 2022 (cropped).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:52, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Meloni Official Portrait2022 (cropped).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:06, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

I am very skeptical about having Mussolini in the lead. But if he is in the lead, we should say that she praised him when she was 19. Saying that she praised him in 1996 is inadequate because it would require people to do some math to figure out she was a teenager. Teenagers say all kinds of crazy things, and most readers will not weight them as heavily as if said by an older person. The *only* reason to say “1996” and not “19” is to obscure the truth: that she was just a teenager. Here is the edit. Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:55, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

So what that she was 19? As recently as two years ago, she praised Almirante, the co-founder of a party including actual Fascists after the fall of the Mussolini regime. Ultimately, what matters are reliable sources and since there is a section about it (per significant coverage by reliable sources), it is lead worthy. Note that we also say she condemned the end of democracy and the anti-Jewish laws. I have not written that part or even the whole lead but I think it is balanced. Davide King (talk) 19:58, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

You may not think her age was significant, but reliable sources do, see Ritchie, Alice and Branchereau, Gael. “Italy’s Giorgia Meloni: From teen activist who praised Mussolini to brink of power” Times of Israel (26 Sep 2022). Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:35, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Ironically, the fact we have so many reliable sources mentioning this after all these years, it means it's certainly due. I've since clarified the year-age stuff, but it's lead worthy. Davide King (talk) 21:11, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

In Italy when people are 19yo, they are not teenagers. Italians gain the right to vote at 18yo and they are considered adults. This information is relevant also because, when she founded her party 'Brothers of Italy'(FdL) in 2012, Meloni decided to add the tricolour flame to the party flag, a symbol associated with MSI, which derived its name and ideals from the RSI as a "violent, socializing, and revolutionary republican" variant of Italian fascism established as a Nazi German puppet state by Mussolini in 1943. Also the tricolour flame represents for the supporters of Fdl Mussolini's remains, where a flame is always burning on his tomb in Predappio. So, Mussolini is relevant in the lead? Yes, it is! 79.66.217.217 (talk) 22:06, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

This is the English Wikipedia, and “teenager” is an English word. She praised Mussolini when she was 19. At that time she was a teenager per English dictionaries which say it’s 13 to 19 inclusive. This is confirmed explicitly by this headline. So your edit summary is mistaken. Older teenagers have a right to vote in the USA, there’s nothing contradictory about that. Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:16, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

This is the English Wikipedia, but you are talking about Italian topics and not American topics, where the age of majority varies from 18 to 21

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_majority

Furthermore, you are trying to use a term which is often used to refer to a physical and psychological development of a person, to something related to adulthood as recognised or declared in law. Plus, your main worry was "Mussolini in the lead"!79.66.217.217 (talk) 22:29, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

In English, the word teenager merely means older than 12 and younger than 20. There are no additional legal or psychological aspects to it. In English, the numbers 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 all end with “teen” which is different from how these numbers are pronounced and written in Italian. Teen and teenager simply refers to people over 12 and under 20, and “under 20” is a common term in Italian. See here. I strongly oppose having her praise for Mussolini in this lead without saying she was a teenager or under 20, otherwise readers will not bother to do the math. Our sources do the same. Do you have a different opinion because you do not want readers to realize she was under 20? Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:04, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Wasn't your main worry 'Mussolini in the lead'? It is not a discussion about the use of the word 'teenager' in the English language. We are talking about Italian topics! I don't understand why you posted the website of the Italian national football. "under 20"? Seriously? This has nothing to do with the the term 'teenager' in Italian! Posting a link to as Israeli website also doesn't support anything! 79.66.217.217 (talk) 23:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Mussolini can be in the lead, but only with caution. WP:BLP applies here: “Biographies of living persons (‘BLPs’) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment.” It is cautious to not assume readers will do the math. There is no term “teenager” in Italian, by the way. That’s because numbers from 12 to 19 are not pronounced and written with the same four letters at the end, as they are in English. Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:28, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

After the war the Italian Social Movement was the main neo-fascist organisation. It gathered veterans of the Italian Social Republic and was unapologetic about its support for Fascism until its rebranding (to "National Alliance") and national-conservative turn in 1994. Despite this, it remained frequent for its members - and members of its successor parties including Brothers of Italy - to come up with controversial remarks or engage in equivocal comments about WWII (e.g., saying that Mussolini had also done good things for the country, that people who collaborated with Germans were also fighting for a honorable cause, that Italy's war was overall 'clean' compared to Germany's, that Axis crimes had been exaggerated, etc.).

Giorgia Meloni joined the MSI in 1992, when she was 15. She made the remark in 1996, as the leader of National Alliance's student wing. I disagree with the importance that you place on her age. This wasn't a fluke or an edgy teenager comment, but the average view of members of her political culture at the time (ex-MSI, AN members). A 30- or 50-year old from her party would have said the same thing, it would've been unexpected for them to say otherwise. Stressing the fact that this occurred in a long time ago imo is more important than a mention of the age because it leaves room for development of her opinions over time. Dismissing it as a teenage opinion also seems a little condescending.

At this point I would rather see something more generic in the lead, (e.g., something to the effect "Meloni has garnered controversy due to her history with neo-fascism" or "... due to her party's relationship with neo-fascism" or similar), since the Mussolini's statement is already mentioned in the "Relationship with fascism" section. Either way, as it's written now it looks very awkward - more than conservatively it sounds like it's trying to excuse her. Daydreamers (talk) 00:50, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

@Daydreamers — yeah, I can see your point. Personally, I'd prefer using the year because it's more precise (1996 is a long time ago and one can see it was when she was much younger anyway; if she was underage, I'd be more inclined to use age) to avoid excusing it as if it was an edgy teenager statement, as you wrote; however, the refs we use empashize that she was 19, though they don't do that to excuse her comments but merely as a timeline (e.g. they say "the 45-year old", "when she was 15"). Since her comments about Mussolini have been often cited in general articles about her, it means they're due for the lead. In fact, I'd probably add your suggested wording "Meloni has garnered controversy due to [her history with neo-fascism or her and her party's neo-fascist roots] as an intro to summarize the "Relationship with fascism" section and then more or less keep the current wording. Both her comments about Mussolini and Almirante have received sufficient coverage and have been cited in general articles about her that summarizes her political career, which in my view makes it due for the lead. Davide King (talk) 12:42, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

The lead says Almirante was a “Nazi collaborator”. But the sourcing is very weak: an opinion piece in The Independent, plus an editorial in an Italian newspaper that explicitly relies upon a tweet. According to our article Collaboration with the Axis powers, collaborators were typically understood to be people in countries occupied by the axis powers, whereas Italy was itself an Axis power. Almirante was a government official in Italy starting in 1943. I doubt that all members of the Italian government were at that time “collaborators”. If so, then we need better sourcing. Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:53, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I think it is probably meant to be more Nazi (wartime) collaborator. The Italian article "Collaborazionism" (link to the English "Wartime collaboration" rather than "Nazi collaboration", which redirects to "Collaboration with the Axis powers"). The RSI technically does fit the former description in this sense, as a part of Italy was no longer part of the Axis Powers in 1943 and the Togliatti amnesty referred to those collaborationists in this sense because they were considered to be doing "cooperation with the enemy against one's country of citizenship in wartime". It should probably be unlinked or redirect to "Wartime collaboration" instead. Davide King (talk) 23:06, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Why not just say he was a member of the Mussolini government? “Wartime collaboration is cooperation with the enemy against one's country of citizenship in wartime.” Germany was not an enemy of Italy. Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:12, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

It was an enemy when Italy changed sides, while Almirante and other Fascists followed Mussolini in the RSI, which in practice a Nazi puppet state. Davide King (talk) 23:29, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

That’s an interesting point, I hadn’t read much about this aspect of WWII. So are you saying that the dictator Mussolini was deposed by his king, and subsequently (after getting out of jail) Mussolini became a nazi collaborator? Maybe, but I haven’t yet seen Mussolini characterized as such. More to the point, I haven’t seen Almirante characterized as such, except by the two opinion pieces that we cite as sources. Also see this article involving a similar question about France. Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

It depends on what is meant by that — he was already an ally of Nazi Germany so my understanding is that those who followed Mussolini and the Nazis in the RSI, rather than the King and Allied Italy, were Nazi collaborators in this sense; they were Italians but cooperated ("against one's country of citizenship in wartime") with Nazi Germany ("cooperation with the enemy") — Almirante joined the RSI. From The Forward, "In 1942, Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels wrote a frustrated diary entry about Italy's 'extremely lax' treatment of Jews: even though fascist dictator Benito Mussolini (1883–1945) was a Hitler ally who enacted antisemitic laws, everyday Italians resisted deporting their country's Jews to the Nazi killing machine. This changed in 1943, when Mussolini was deposed and Italy surrendered to the Allies. Germany responded by invading the northern half of Italy and making Mussolini head of the Italian Social Republic (RSI), a Nazi puppet state. Over 7,800 Italian Jews trapped in RSI territory were imprisoned, deported and murdered." This piece by Il Post (not an op-ed) refers to him as a collaborazionista dei nazisti (lit. collaborator of the Nazis). Davide King (talk) 00:28, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

No doubt Mussolini's last government was vicious, and no doubt Almirante worked for it. There are hundreds of reliable sources that describe all of that, but only a few that use the "nazi collaborator" description for Almirante (and none that do so for Mussolini whose orders Almirante was following). If Meloni had said how much she respects and admires the "nazi collaborator" Almirante, and what a great job he did collaborating with the nazis, then I'd have no qualm about it being in the lead, but of course she didn't say anything like that, and there's no indication she was referring to anything other than his postwar career. All in all, I would prefer if, instead of "nazi collaborator", we'd follow in the lead the NYT obit of Almirante which is not fawning in the least, yet omits the "nazi collaborator" label in favor of "minor role in Mussolini's last government". I'll leave it at that, thanks for the discussion. Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:50, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

As I said, I think it depends on what's the term usage, because there's no doubt he—like the Fascists in the RSI—collaborated with the Nazis against Italy's legitimate government since 1943. So perhaps it should be unliked or reworded to say "served as a civil minister in Mussolini's last government" but I'd prefer to just unlink it since Wartime collaboration may be more accurate. During his time, he did sign a manifesto that draft dodgers and deserters would be sentenced to death by shooting and he lost a defamation case in 1978 after a newspaper published the retrieved manifesto and called him a "servant of the Nazis". There's also La Reubblica (2020): "[Almirante says that] In other words, if the Constitution and the laws have not been enforced, it is not my [Almirante's] fault. And the police confinement to which Almirante was sentenced in 1947? A lawyer reminds him of the serious measure undergone for collaboration with the Germans and for post-war activities. But the [MSI] secretary has confused memories. He is only interested in pointing out the total extraneousness to the manifesto published in the newspapers and to the death notice pronounced by Mussolini and Graziani. ... The trial could quickly close, as Occorsio encourages, but the acquittal of the journalists implies that Almirante is guilty." Thanks to you for the discussion. Perhaps @Yakme can clarify this for us and whether I missed anything. Davide King (talk) 12:00, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

I am no MSI nor Almirante expert. Since this is the lead section of the article about Giorgia Meloni, I would be fine with not going into large details about Almirante's life. So "co-founder of MSI" is also enough IMO, although I do not see how does this mean "controversy" – unless one knows Italian political history. Also I don't think she praised him for being a Nazi collaborator, but only for being the leader of her mother-party during post-war Italy. I see the main "controversy" here being the fact that she praised Mussolini, rather than Almirante. Yakme (talk) 12:14, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

She did also praise him as "a patriot", when for Italy he was a traitor in 1943–1945, wasn't he? Davide King (talk) 12:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Regarding this, it's incorrect to say that she praised him only as the founder of the MSI; she praised him as "a patriot", someone who joined the RSI and collaborated with Nazi Germany? Looks more like a traitor to me and reliable sources. Davide King (talk) 19:57, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

We could add a paragraph to the JFK lead saying he praised Werner von Braun who had been a Nazi advocate of slave labor, and praised his father Joe Kennedy who had been a Hitler fan, and JFK also had an affair during WWII with a Nazi and Hitler buddy named Inga Arvad. I don’t think we should add such a paragraph to the JFK bio’s lead. We already have her praise of Mussolini in this lead, and that seems like enough to alert readers about this general concern. Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Sorry but this is more of a strawman. Unlike Kennedy, that would be wholly undue, whereas in this case we have plenty of reliable sources that covered this. Perhaps in the future it would become undue but it's relevant. We actually have a section dedicated to her complicated relationship with fascism, whereas the stuff you mentioned don't even make it his article (perhaps in the future, considering Meloni's future whole life and career, those stuff wouldn't make it either but they're relevant and due as of now), so the lead should contain a summary of that. It's also a wholly different situation as, unlike Kennedy, Meloni comes from a party with neo-fascist roots. Again, if the issue is the use of 'Nazi collaborator', I think both of your latest edit and my further copyediting, which removed that term from the lead, it should be fine now. Davide King (talk) 20:30, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

I added a bit. Anythingyouwant Anythingyouwant) 21:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Italian historians agree that the Italian Social Republic was a German puppet state, whose members were Nazi collaborators.

https://www.laterza.it/scheda-libro/?isbn=9788858149133

https://www.jstor.org/stable/43592558

https://www.jstor.org/stable/41057588

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/79616608.pdf

Giorgio Almirante was widely recognised as a Nazi collaborator. I am struggling to understand what Anythingyouwant is trying to convey, trough a superficial research on Internet and not on history books! 79.66.217.217 (talk) 23:08, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Mussolini’s last government is often referred to using adjectives, and collaborationist is less common than others. I am satisfied with the last paragraph of the lead as it stands now. I am unaware that Meloni was praising Almirante for collaborating with Hitler, or for anything before the post-war period. Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:17, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

We are talking about the Italian Social Republic, not the different phases of the Fascist governments, before 1943! I provided different sources where you can examine in depth and study the topics you have scarse knowledge! Meloni praised Giorgio Almirante, who was a Nazi collaborator and a fascist politician, who was the editor of the racist magazine La Difesa della Razza! 79.66.217.217 (talk) 23:33, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

It currently says:

Per WP:CONTENTIOUS, we should skip the “controversial” label. Likewise, the last sentence would be more concise if we just say “Nevertheless, she has condemned….” instead of implying she likes fascist leaders generally (as opposed to having said some nice things about just two dead ones). Regarding Almirante, this paragraph only mentions stuff from WWII, whereas he had a long political career until 1987, and Meloni may well have had the latter in mind rather than the former. So, I’d write:

Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:11, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Given the amount of noise that this paragraph is generating, and given that at the moment it is visibly spelled in order to make the reader think "well, she was only 19, so it's fine I guess?", I would at this point just remove the whole paragraph – this would probably save a lot of controversy and discussion. After all, many Italian politicians have praised Mussolini in a similar way to Meloni, and they were grown-up adults, like Berlusconi, but surely there is no reference to that in the lead of Silvio Berlusconi, or other right-wing Italian politicians who praised Mussolini for something. Yakme (talk) 09:07, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Anythingyouwant We shouldn't skip the “controversial” label, because her statement actually generated controversies in the Italian public debate. The Constitution of Italy is based on antifascist values, written by antifascists (see Constituent Assembly of Italy) and which clearly states in the article XII (in TRANSITIONAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS) "It shall be forbidden to reorganise, under any form whatsoever, the dissolved Fascist party".

The fact Giorgia Meloni (president and founder of FdL with roots on neofascist party and the Italian Social Republic) stated that "Mussolini was the best politician in the last 50 years", it is actually 'controversial'.

Also, the fact Meloni added in her party logo in 2012 a tricolour flame, which represents for many party's supporters "the flame that burns on Mussolini's tomb", it is controversial.

As I reported in other comment, Holocaust survivor Liliana Segre asked Meloni to remove the tricolour flame, because it is considered a neo-fascist symbol. But Meloni ignored Segre's request.

https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2022/08/12/liliana-segre-e-pd-chiedono-a-meloni-di-togliere-la-fiamma-tricolore-dal-simbolo-di-fdi-partiamo-dai-fatti-non-dalle-parole/6760622/

Yakme Obviously you can't compare the fact that in the lead of Berlusconi, it is not included his sentence on Mussolini ("Mussolini made some good things, but not the racial laws"). There are many 'controversial' statements by Berlusconi and clearly we can't add all of them. however, it is important that in the lead of Berlusconi, it is included he has been a convicted criminal. Furthermore, Berlusconi's party has always declared to be a liberal party, and it is not a party, whose roots are from the fascist Italian Social Republic. 79.66.217.217 (talk) 14:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

The Wikipedia guideline that I already linked and referred to says, “Rather than describing an individual using the subjective and vague term controversial, instead give readers information about relevant controversies.” Anythingyouwant (talk) 15:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

That’s interesting, User:Yakme, I hadn’t realized Berlusconi did that. He said in 2013, “The racial laws were the worst fault of Mussolini as a leader, who in so many other ways did well….” See “Berlusconi defends Mussolini, draws outrage from political left”. I support Yakme’s suggestion to remove the last paragraph of the lead, because the paragraph has the problems I already described at the start of this talk page section, and it would be an endless battle to try to put that paragraph into an acceptable condition. Anythingyouwant (talk) 15:37, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree with the IP. We don't see reliable sources routinely pointing out Berslusconi's statements about fascism, whereas we do for Meloni. It's also a vastly different situation, as Meloni is the head of a party with neo-fascist roots (per RS), which they deny or minimize. We don't have a section about Berlusconi's relationship with fascism because it would be undue for his long career, whereas for Meloni and FdI they're clearly relevant not just for me but per reliable sources too. The lead should summarize the body and her relationship with fascism must be shortly summarized in the lead. I do agree with Yakme's comment that "well, she was only 19, so it's fine I guess?", and I would just put the years (it's very easy to do a math, c'mon) but I'm opposed to full removal and I'd be fine with the current wording, which includes her being 19 even if I think the year would be enough. Disagreement among ourselves isn't a good enough reason to remove content that must be summarized in the lead since we have a section about it, which is clearly due and relevant per RS and includes both uncontroversial facts (that she did say that, that RSI was a Nazi puppet state, etc.), attributed opinions (three historians), examples of FdI's distancing from neo-fascists and others where they minimized it, and Meloni's response about the issue. I think it's neutral and balanced enough and is thus worth being summarized in the lead. Davide King (talk) 16:27, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for putting the “nevertheless” into the lead’s last paragraph. No one has objected to describing Almirante’s postwar career as suggested above, so I’ll do that. As far as her age, I think that’s more than sufficient, no need to mention the year (1996) as well. Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:53, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Like Davide King, I don't support the suggestion to remove the last paragraph of the lead, because Meloni's statement on Mussolini did generate relevant and factual (and not subjective or vague) controversies (information has been provided from relevant French and Italian media). Meloni never expressed a clear and unambiguous declaration of condemnation of Mussolini. Her ambiguity is expressed also in her autobiography and in the numerous interviews she gave over the years.

(source: Giorgia Meloni (2021), I am Giorgia, my roots, my ideas. Rizzoli. ISBN 978-8-8171-5468-0) 79.66.217.217 (talk) 16:58, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Obviously the ambiguity of Giorgia Meloni and her party's members towards fascism (and its ideals) has been a constant over the years.

Giorgia Meloni calling George Soros as usurer (perpetrating the fascist prejudice of Jews as usurers).

https://twitter.com/GiorgiaMeloni/status/1109825289897549824

Fdl's members doing the Fascist salute on the International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_DXpeGtTvQ 79.66.217.217 (talk) 17:27, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

We ought to try and stick with quality encyclopedic sources, and if we instead use opinion pieces and editorials then we ought to have in-line attribution. So, these two sources should probably be removed:

• "Giorgia Meloni ricorda il 'patriota' Almirante, bufera sul web: 'Collaborò coi nazisti e fu firmatario delle leggi razziali'" [Giorgia Meloni remembers the 'patriot' Almirante, storm on the web: 'He collaborated with the Nazis and was a signatory of the racial laws']. Editorial. Il Riformista (in Italian). 22 May 2020. Archived from the original on 13 December 2021. Retrieved 14 August 2022. [W]rites one [Twitter] user, 'We, on the other hand, will never forget that he was a collaborator of the Nazis and a signatory of the racial laws'.
• Carlo, Andrea (29 July 2022). "I'm Italian and I'm deeply worried about our probable next prime minister". Voices (opinion). The Independent. Archived from the original on 6 August 2022. Retrieved 14 August 2022. Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:43, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Anythingyouwant The first piece is not an editorial, but an article (signed 'Redazione'). Please, don't remove Italian sources if you don't speak the language and you don't know what you are reading. Please, be more respectful of the contribution by people who actual can read the sources in the original language. 79.66.217.217 (talk) 17:56, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Redazione” means “editorial board”. You can confirm this at Google translate. If you don’t trust Google, please see here. Even if it is a news article, it would be a very low quality one, as it relies upon a random tweet which it quotes in the headline. Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:04, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Anythingyouwant "Redazione" doesn't mean 'editorial board'. In Italian journalism, newspapers use the term 'redazione' (editorial staff=journalists), when the articles are written by journalists, not by the editorials board, director or other commentators. Please, avoid to use google translator or free online translation tool, which offer always a limited version of a complete dictionary. The article is not 'low quality': the Italian online news sites offer often a short version of the article and use multimedia addiction, like Twitter citation. 79.66.217.217 (talk) 18:32, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

My understanding is that the Italian article is written by the editorial staff and isn't an opinion pieace like The Independent. Davide King (talk) 18:46, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Op-eds doesn't mean that they can never be used, just that they may need to be attributed. They, and other refs that are not op-eds, are mostly used for uncontroversial stuff, like that she indeed praised Almirante. Again, do you personally doubt that RSI wasn't a Nazi puppet state, that Almirante wasn't the eidtor-in-chief of an antisemitic and racist magazine, that he wasn't a civil minister in the RSI, etc.? Davide King (talk) 18:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I explicitly said in my initial comment in this talk page section that we could use in-line attribution. But why not use a decent source instead? This is not a question of article content, only what reference we use. We should use good references, correct? Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:09, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

There already are, it's just that they're put in the first sentence and the others at the end for the aforementioned uncontroversial facts, which do not need attribution, to avoid ref bombing of more than three refs. See also:

• https://www.repubblica.it/politica/2020/01/21/news/chi_era_giorgio_almirante_e_perche_nascose_la_sua_lotta_ai_partigiani-301067059/
• https://www.repubblica.it/commenti/2020/05/22/news/le_radici_fasciste_di_almirante-300818136/

Davide King (talk) 18:13, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

So what exactly do we need to attribute? To a bunch of newspapers that she indeed praised Almirante as a good politician and patriot? That he was a civil minister in Mussolini's RSI, which collaborated with the Nazis, that he was editor-in-chief of a racist or antisemitic magazine, and had a long-time neo-fascist political career? Unless I'm missing something, those are all uncontroversial facts. Davide King (talk) 18:18, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Besides, both The Independent and Il Riformista are supported by https://www.ilpost.it/2020/01/22/storia-giorgio-almirante/ by Il Post, which is clearly not an op-ed. Davide King (talk) 18:27, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I’m simply trying to follow WP:BLP which says “Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources.” We don’t necessarily have to change article text at all, we don’t even need to swap in better sources, just rely on the existing good sources while deleting the bad ones. Opinion pieces and random tweets are not good sources. Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps it was the fault of one user adding the quote part about one user tweeting that, when the source itself states: "Una figura controversa, passato dalla direzione della rivista 'La difesa della razza', dove sosteneva come necessaria la protezione dell'Italia da 'meticci ed ebrei', al rispetto per gli avversari politici, con la sua presenza ai funerali del leader comunista Enrico Berlinguer." Davide King (talk) 18:42, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Anythingyouwant You should use high-quality dictionaries, if you are trying to translate articles in a languages you don't speak with low-quality online tools. Il Riformista is a high-quality source and not like you write a "very low quality source". The online version of an article is always shorter than the paper version or the online version of the article when you pay a membership. Again, please, don't remove Italian sources if you don't speak the language and you don't know what you are reading, writing inaccurate, inexact and unreliable comments. 79.66.217.217 (talk) 18:43, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

• No one claims that the piece by Andrea Carlo is a high-quality reliable source, so I plan to remove it, with no change to article text. Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:50, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  Don't do that, it doesn't mean it can't be used and it's currently used for a Meloni quote about her appearance at Le Iene and that Almirante was the editor-in-chief of an antisemitic and racist magazine. Anyway, I think the major issue was the 'Nazi collaborator' bit, which would need better sourcing (The Independent piece does call him a Nazi collaborator, but we aren't using that wording now), but we've since fixed the wording. Davide King (talk) 18:52, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  The Andrea Carlo piece is opinion, therefore a primary source. If you’d like to try and use it correctly with in-line attribution, that’s fine, but it’s currently being misused. Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:58, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  The problem is that we aren't using it to express the author's opinion, which would be an issue, so what is it to attribute? Currently, we're using it to support a quote Meloni said and that she said Almirante was "a patriot". As many sources are in Italian (nothing wrong with that), it's good to have an English source that is published in a reliable source, even if it's an opinion piece, and use it for uncontroversial facts. Davide King (talk) 19:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  Davide King Giorgio Almirante was a Nazi collaborator. It is not an opinion of Andrea Carlo, but a fact. Historians agree on this, Almirante wasn't shy about his role in the Repubblica Sociale Italiana and I posted previously historiographic sources about the fact that Almirante was a Nazi collaborator from jstor sources.

  This is an article and not an opinion piece:

  https://www.ilpost.it/2020/01/22/storia-giorgio-almirante/ 79.66.217.217 (talk) 19:14, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  I agree, I'm just willing to compromise for the wording. In fact, Anythingyouwant, didn't you say you were fine with using 'Nazi collaborator' in the body but not in the lead? Davide King (talk) 19:16, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  Using a reliable Italian-language source is fine, we don’t have to supplement it with an unreliable English-language source. But if we do, in-line attribution is necessary, even if the opinion piece is just repeating stuff from the Italian piece. Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:26, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  An op-ed is not, in itself, unreliable and The Independent isn't unreliable; it just means that it must be used with care, which I think we already do by using it for uncontroversial facts rather than the author's personal views, which I agree would need to be attributed. Davide King (talk) 23:56, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  Per WP:EXCEPTIONAL, “Exceptional claims require exceptional sources”. You’re using an anti-Meloni opinion piece to support article text saying that she’d rather not have a gay child, and other article text saying Almirante was a wartime collaborator. That’s unacceptable. If this opinion piece is not needed to support those statements then there’s no harm in deleting it, and if those statements require this opinion piece for support, then we shouldn’t be making those statements. Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:54, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

  Anythingyouwant Both statements (Meloni saying she’d rather not have a gay child and saying Almirante was a wartime collaborator) have high-quality sources. When I added the information "Meloni saying she’d rather not have a gay child", I added also the actual interview (to the program 'Le iene") published on the website of Il Secolo XIX (high quality and one of the oldest newspapers in Italy).

  https://video.ilsecoloxix.it/embed/italia/giorgia-meloni-alle-iene-preferirei-non-avere-un-figlio-gay/16784/16784 79.66.217.217 (talk) 09:48, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

  As noted by the IP, that's exactly what she said, so it's not exceptional. Davide King (talk) 12:22, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

  To be clear, "that's exactly what she said" refers to her saying she'd rather not have a gay child. She, of course, didn't say Almirante was a Nazi wartime collaborator, but this isn't disputed by us or reliable sources. Davide King (talk) 12:32, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

  If you got confused thinking that was Andrea Carlo expressing his view that Meloni would rather not have a gay child, you indeed got confused. He just mentioned the interview at Le Iene where she said precisely that. Davide King (talk) 12:34, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

  No, I didn’t get confused. Opinion pieces are really lousy sources anywhere at Wikipedia. Here it was used on a high-profile BLP to support a very controversial statement. And I swapped it with a perfectly good secondary source just now, even though another source wasn’t really needed. Brezar, Aleksander. “Italy election: In Rome's progressive neighbourhood, Meloni's victory causes anger and concern”, Euronews (28 Sep 2022). Anythingyouwant (talk) 14:00, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

  Again, that doesn't mean they can never be used. "Here it was used on a high-profile BLP to support a very controversial statement." Which one? That Almirante was a Nazi collaborator? That has already been fixed. Davide King (talk) 17:16, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

  The Andrea Carlo article is an opinion piece and not an article and you can remove it. 79.66.217.217 (talk) 18:58, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

This article says, “In 1996, she became the national leader of Student Action, the student movement of the National Alliance (AN), the national-conservative heir of the MSI, representing this movement in the Student Associations Forum established by the Italian Ministry of Education.” Would it be accurate to say in parentheses after that wikilink “(rather than fascist)”? Seems like there was a difference between AN & MSI, and we ought to be more clear and briefly describe the difference, instead of making readers click on links to figure it out. Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:04, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Doesn't "national-conservative" already implies that? AN was also "post-fascist" but Post-fascism redirects to Neo-fascism. "Yet this is not to say that the fascist heritage in the new 'post-fascist' AN faded altogether. At least at the beginning, Fini had a double standard of communication, one for inside the party, stressing continuity with fascism, one for outside the party, stressing change." From Extreme Right Activists in Europe: Through the Magnifying Glass. Davide King (talk) 01:02, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I don’t think “national-conservative” says anything about how fascist it is. Just like “national-socialist” wouldn’t. Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:07, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

'National-conservative' is nothing like 'national-socialist', which is an euphemism for Nazi. I have never seen 'national-conservative' being used as an euphemism for fascism. In fact, it could be correctly said that AN was the national-conservative heir of the MSI, whereas Tricolour Flame was its neo-fascist heir. Davide King (talk) 01:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree “national-conservative” is nothing like “national-socialist”, and maybe we should briefly says so for readers who are unfamiliar with this stuff. We could insert the parenthetical that I suggested at my first comment in this talk page section. Okay? Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:30, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

That's what links are made for. Besides, the source I provided is more cautious, saying AN on one hand stressed continuity with fascism inside the party, to which Meloni belonged at the time, and from the outside was more post-fascist. Davide King (talk) 02:41, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

It would be better to use 'neo-fascist' for the MSI and 'post-fascist' for AN and explain it then moved in a national-conservative direction, without adding the "rather than" parenthesis, since us saying "moved towards a national-conservative direction" already implies that it moderated itself and didn't move in a "fascist direction". Davide King (talk) 02:48, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

At the end of the lead, would it be accurate to add something like “as have her political party (Brothers of Italy) and her previous party (National Alliance)?” This would give readers a better idea of the environment from which she comes. Anythingyouwant (talk) 03:37, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Anythingyouwant What do you mean with "we ought to be more clear and describe the difference..." when you show the lack of basic knowledge in Italian political history! The party AN started as heir of MSI, both post-fascist parties. Gianfranco Fini, president of AN, tried to start, with the so-called process Svolta di Fiuggi [it], abandoning ideological references to fascism in order to qualify AN as a legitimate political force to govern. The climax of this process was the declaration made by Fini during a trip in Israel in 2003 in which he described fascism as the "absolute evil". This declaration caused a revolt and an uproar within the party, which paved the way to the dissolution of the party and the disappearance of Fini from the political scene. Many party members criticised Fini's move, included Giorgia Meloni that rejected completely what Fini did in Israel. So, the difference is that while Gianfranco Fini unambiguously condemned Mussolini, Giorgia Meloni never expressed clearly and unambiguously the condemnation of fascism and Mussolini. It is already clear in the lead that Meloni comes from AN and clearly she wasn't approving "the environment" in which AN was transforming.79.66.217.217 (talk) 13:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

The Brothers of Italy party has condemned suppression of democracy and the racial laws from WWII and before. Since no one disputes that, I’ve briefly added it at the end of the lead. Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

To be fair, that's what she said and the source attributes it to her. In practice, her and the party have been more ambiguous (she said she didn't distance from Fini when he described fascism as the "absolute evil" but she never said it outright herself), distancing in some cases (Ascoli Piceno and the pro-Hitler candidate who still won in the end) and not in others (Roman salutes and the Fanpage investigation). "Post-Fascism in Italy: 'So Why This Flame Mrs. Giorgia Meloni'" says: "Secondly, at the local level, the party has never failed to flaunt its sympathy towards nostalgia of fascism during (online) public assemblies of representative bodies." So I don't know if that's also for the whole party, and secondary sources may be more sceptical, but she did indeed say her party has condemned suppression of democracy and the racial laws. I think it should be attributed to her like the sources did. Davide King (talk) 19:41, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I think the previous wording was fine but if we want to incorporate 'the party' in the lead, "Meloni has said she and her party ..." would be more precise and closer to what reliable sources have said, since they have attributed it to her and it's worded from a quote of her. Davide King (talk) 19:58, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Done. Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:10, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I've removed full names of the parties in that last part since they're already fully-wikilinked in the lede. I've replaced it with its abbreviations. Vacant0 (talk) 11:07, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, they condemn it one day and the day after celebrate and acclaim Mussolini. Like for example, just last month Ignazio Benito La Russa (founder with Meloni of Brothers of Italy) said that "We Italians are all Mussolini's heirs'" or during the Covid pandemic, La Russa invited everyone to perform the Fascist salute! 79.66.217.217 (talk) 20:31, 4 October 2022 (UTC)