Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. Ifconsensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject World Heritage Sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of World Heritage Sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.World Heritage SitesWikipedia:WikiProject World Heritage SitesTemplate:WikiProject World Heritage SitesWorld Heritage Sites articles
You can help expand this article with text translated from the corresponding article in Italian. Click [show] for important translation instructions.
View a machine-translated version of the Italian article.
Machine translation, like DeepL or Google Translate, is a useful starting point for translations, but translators must revise errors as necessary and confirm that the translation is accurate, rather than simply copy-pasting machine-translated text into the English Wikipedia.
Consider adding a topic to this template: there are already 696 articles in the main category, and specifying|topic= will aid in categorization.
Do not translate text that appears unreliable or low-quality. If possible, verify the text with references provided in the foreign-language article.
You must provide copyright attribution in the edit summary accompanying your translation by providing an interlanguage link to the source of your translation. A model attribution edit summary is Content in this edit is translated from the existing Italian Wikipedia article at [[:it:Firenze]]; see its history for attribution.
You may also add the template {{Translated|it|Firenze}} to the talk page.
Someone please change the august highest temp record which has been broken yesterday at 41.1 degrees celcius. For some reason the weatherbox isn't editable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syllynqt (talk • contribs) 14:05, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Cathedral, called "il Duomo" from the Latin word domus, house, for house of God, not because of the dome.
I would like to report a factual error in the above statement. 'Domus' was used to indicate the house of the bishop and not the House of God. One can appreciate why by examining the Latin origin of the word.
Classical Latin has two words for house: 'domus' and 'casa'. The latter indicates the humble sheds of peasants while the former the large dwellings of nobles. After the fall of the Roman Empire and prior to the arrival of the Longobards jointly-controlled Roman-Barbarian kingdoms were created.
Roman power, however, was circumscribed to the cities where the patricians and the bishops lived. The bishops, usually of Roman extraction, quickly became the leaders of the Roman group in the cities and assumed some of the old imperial powers. As de facto lords of the city, their residences, that is the cathedrals which are the seat of the bishops, were referred to as 'domus', that is the 'house of the 'lord of the city' (note the lowercase 'L').
Hi, Maveric149. I've removed the chronological sub-headings principally because I don't think they're helpful in an article of this length (though it may of course grow in future). On a more philosophical note, though, I think trying to divide up history according to such a strict chronological regime breaks up the flow of an article and imposes a structure that impedes thematic duscussion.
It's often more useful to look at aspects of a historical topic rather than just to go for straightforward chronological narrative. That's not such a major issue here, where the treatment is more or less chronological, but I think there's a tendency among all of us (I'm guilty too) to write a list of events when we should be looking at contexts and relationships as well as causes and consequences, which may cut across periodisation. -- David Parker
As I stated when I first placed them, the sub-headings were experimental. However,I have to disagree on their removal at this point. Don't get me wrong, whith most other cities it is more appropriate to, as you said, not break up the history in such a rigid fashion. However, the history of Florence is quite extensive and can, to some degree, be segmented a bit into roughly chronological themes -- otherwise the history section will become unapproachably long to the average reader (who could otherwise simply scan the headings and get an idea on where to start reading based on his/her interest in a particular roughly chronological theme). My plan all along was to write a rather loose summary that does look at causes, effects and relationships between the different parts of Florentine history after the history section matured a bit.
I am willing to hear a good idea or two on how to better do this, if one is not forthcoming, I will reinstate the the sub-headings (which are still experimental -- that is until someone either thinks of better sub-headings, or a better way to organize the history section -- keeping in mind that this section is going to be greatly expanded). maveric149
"undermined Medieval" what "in favor of those of classical antiquity"? Aesthetics? Styles? Philosophy? Can whoever wrote that sentence put the missing word in, please?
The most famous palace in the city is San Lorenzo, which has become a monument to the Medici family who ruled Florence during the 15th century. This palace holds the Uffizi Gallery ...
Is this correct? What has [the church of] S. Lorenzo to do with the Uffizi?
Sebastjan
I noticed it about the same time you did and just changed it; certainly they are not the same building. -- Infrogmation 07:30 Apr 21, 2003 (UTC)
Florence is important in Transport today his massive change to pedestrian streets of the center have produced a better environment Does anybody have a picture of this pedestrian streets? Also Does anybody know the date of such conversion? I remember something like the sixties.Milton 20:03, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I removed Leonardo da Vinci from the list of people from Florence, because he's from Vinci... yes, I know he spent important time in Florence, but he also spent important time in Milan and Paris. That doesn't mean he's from those cities either. --mjlodge 22:21, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Vinci is a comune 5 km far from Florence. And not spent important time in Paris. SγωΩηΣtαlk 11:16, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Suggest you check a map, such as [1]. Vinci is approx half-way between Florence and Lucca -- far, far further than 5km. And in Medieval times, that meant a world of difference. Not sure what "not spent important time in Paris" means, but check an art history book on Da Vinci for details on his time spent working at the Medici court in Paris/France. mjlodge 03:17, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I fully agree with mjlodge. Jcr2 07:15, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
mmm... Yes, you're right :) But he spent his youth only in Florence, not in Vinci.(sorry for english) I propose somethings like:
I had an occasion to go to that page, and discovered that almost all of it was taken up by material not about the province, but about the city. I deleted there; maybe someone, however, would like to fold selected bits of it into this page on the city. Here it is then, all of it.
Founded by the Romans in the first century B.C., Florence began its rebirth after the decadence of the barbaric ages, in the Carolingian period, and reached its highest pinnacles of civilization between the 11th and 15th centuries, as a free city, balancing the authority of the Emperors with that of the Popes, overcoming the unfortunate internal dispute between Guelfs and Ghibellines. In the 15th century, it came under the rule of the Medici family, who later became the Grand Dukes of Tuscany. This in fact was the period when the city was at the height of its glory in art and culture, in politics and economic power. The Grand Duchy of the Medicis was succeeded, in the 18th century, by that of the House of Lorraine, when in 1860 Tuscany became part of the Kingdom of Italy of which Florence was the capital from 1865 to 1871. In this century, the city has once more taken up its role as an important centre for culture and the arts.
Florence keeps an exceptional artistic heritage which is a marvellous evidence of its aged culture. Cimabue and Giotto, the fathers of Italian painting, lived in Florence as well as Arnolfo and Andrea Pisano, renewers of architecture and sculpture; Brunelleschi, Donatello and Masaccio forefathers of the Renaissance, Ghiberti and the Della Robbias, Filippo Lippi and Angelico; Botticelli, Paolo Uccello and the universal genius of Leonardo and Michelangelo. Their works, together with those of many other generations of artists up to the artists of our century, are gathered in the several museums of the town: the Uffizzi, the most selected gallery in the world, the Palatina gallery with the paintings of the "Golden Ages" . The Bargello Tower with the sculptures of the Renaissance, the museum of San Marco with Angelico's works, the Academy, the chapels of the Medicis , Buonarroti' s house with the sculptures of Michelangelo, the following museums: Bardini, Horne, Stibbert, Romano, Corsini, The Gallery of Modern Art, The museum of the Opera del Duomo, the museum of Silverware and the museum of Precious Stones. Great monuments are the landmarks of Florentine artistic culture: the Baptistry with its mosaics; the Cathedral with its sculptures, the medieval churches with bands of frescoes; public as well as private palaces: Palazzo Vecchio, Palazzo Pitti, Palazzo Medici Riccardi, Palazzo Davanzati; monasteries, cloisters, refectories; the "Certosa". In the archeological museum you will find plenty of documents of Etruscan civilization.
Florence is a city which bustles with industry and craft, commerce and culture, art and science. Being on the main national railway lines, it is easily accessible from most important places both in Italy and abroad. The Florence "Vespucci" airport, where both national and international airlines stop, is located 5 km from the city centre. The main motorway, A1, connects Florence with Bologna and Milano in the North and Rome and Naples in the South.
I changed the part which read, "the most famous place in Florence is San Lorenzo." I think that is absurd, the most famous church is probably S. Maria del Fiore, the duomo, and the Uffizi, and maybe Pitti Palace are just as famous, this clearly seems to be a POV statement. I also added that the Medici Chapel is in San Lorenzo, instead of there just being a vague reference to the Medici family as a whole. (old comment, but with real name now: ABart2608:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Agreed. San Lorenzo isn't even on many lists of 'sites to see'. On the other hand the image of Santa Maria del Fiore is reproduced everywhere. DMorpheus14:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And I'm very glad you did. It would be a real shame if the nicecest church in my home city became overcrowded with tourists because of a Wikipedia article :-) Sergio Ballestrero18:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi dear, yesterday evening I've tried to add a link that was already present since years inside wikipedia. The link in question is http://www.aboutflorence.com. I've to say that I agree with your policy about links, especially links spam. I know that this can be a problem that wikipedia should "fight" against. But actually I'm not agree about the decision that aboutflorence.com should be a spam/commercial links. Please I invite all of you to visit the site. It exists since years and I can swear is a non commercial project, aimed by young, students and net-workers from Florence. The aim is to offer all kind of information to all kind of visitors about the city of Florence. As you can see there is no banners, no spam links etc. The website is translate in 6 different language and it covers more topics (and in more accessible way) than the official website of Florence council. Actually we are also linked from them (http://www.comune.firenze.it/english/link.htm). I think that aboutflorence.com (as wikipedia.org) should be a very interesting and usefull resource for peoples and visitors, that are searching general or specific information about Florence. That's why we will be happy to see aboutflorence.com linked again from that page :) Thanks for your attention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inslide (talk • contribs)
Hi, Inslide, thanks for your message on my talk page. First thing, thou shalt sign your talk messages. Second thing, I can read your contributions list, and the linkspam you did on Barcelona, and the talk that followed, and the fact that both of the domains that you are spamming on WP have been registered by Scuola Leonardo, as can easily be verified using whois. This would be really an extraordinary coincidence, if it was any coincidence. Regarding the content, there is some, but it's not a reference site of enciclopedic value; the real motivation behind the site seems to provide preferential indications to a few shops or services in the various categories - so I also really doubt your claim that the site is non-commercial. Finally, if you had any other contribution to WP other than those links, or complaints against the fact that those links had been removed, your claims would have a lot more credibility - but I see nothing else in Special:Contributions/Inslide. Therefore, please refrain from adding that link again: Wikipedia is not a link directory. And it does not matter how long they had been there. Thank you. -- Sergio Ballestrero07:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Links to aboutflorence have appeared again, repeatedly added by 81.208.83.232 and Angiolo77, who also added links from the same group of sites to Milan. I'm left wondering if these sites are actually so popular (in which case, why did not anybody reply to my comment above?) or is this just a repeated offender... -- Sergio Ballestrero16:39, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
These sites are the realization of student's project. Most of the content had been produced by students. These sites are the most informative sites and they are mostly non commercial. It's difficult to find so many information about Florence just in one site.
Your motivations, really, are not consistent; and it seems to me that your most important interest is to check this wikipedia page to delete the link; it's very suspicious.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angiolo77 (talk • contribs)
Dear Angiolo77, please check my contribuitions before putting forward such false, grave and definitely unacceptable accusations. My specific interest is to keep the pages that I do care about (and I care about Florence because I was born there) clean from linkspam. I clearly stated above that I do not consider your website relevant enough to withstand the test of the WP:NOT policy; but Wikipedia is not a personal matter, so this can not be final. If you check the history of the page, you will see that that link had been recently deleted by User:El C, not by me. And that I had previously deleted ALL the commercial links, not just that one: [2][3][4]. You are simply the only one who is insisting so much to put it back. Anyway, if you want discuss it on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam, or even to ask for a formal review, you are more than welcome to proceed; just find and read that appropriate procedures to do so. -- Sergio Ballestrero19:45, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK I will study the procedure. I think that there are several more links on Wikipedia that are a lot more commercial than www.aboutflorence.com. for example on Italy there is a site regarding Park that has a full list to Hotels and other commercial sites..... I don't think that it complies with the wikipedia WP:NOT procedure. Dear Ballestrero, I do not think that the number of contributions is everything. I do not want to publicy say why I am suspicious: if you give me a private email, I can send you my opinion. I apologiza if I offended you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angiolo77 (talk • contribs)
Dear Angiolo77, apology only partially accepted, as you still say that you are suspicious. I fully agree with you that there are around on WP links to sites which are much less relevant and much more commercial than yours, which actually has some content and not too much commercial stuff (still quite a lot, anyway). That is just because not every page is constantly reviewed and patrolled against spam, and personally I only care about a few pages that I consider, for reasons of work or affection, relevant. The question of contributions is not about how many, not at all - it's about what those contributions are: if you put time and effort to add actual content, or corrections, or linking between articles that are related, you actually contribute to the development of Wikipedia, making it a more useful tool for users. If you just add links to your own site, or complaints against those who delete them, you are not doing much for it, and you waste the time of people who would prefer to spend that time to do something useful. Since you are from a language school, you could for example instead contribute to WiktionaryZ, or let your students make translations to and from the Italian and English WP. If, anyway, everything you care about is to have your site linked from Florence, read with much care Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Spam#How_not_to_be_a_spammer, Wikipedia:External_links and m:When should I link externally; in any case, since you are the author/owner of the site, you must not add the link by yourself: A website that you own or maintain, even if the guidelines above imply that it should be linked to. This is because of neutrality and point-of-view concerns; neutrality is an important objective at Wikipedia, and a difficult one. If it is relevant and informative, mention it on the talk page and let other — neutral — Wikipedia editors decide whether to add the link. (from Wikipedia:External_links.) Personally, I believe that if on your site there were no commercial links but the language school, a link to it would be absolutely fine, like the one to [5]. And, by the way, please sign your comments, and note that I did reply to the mail that you sent me yesterday. -- Sergio Ballestrero
08:32, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Dear Ballestrero, thank you for your private email and I publicy apologize for my "aggressive" reply. You clarified me everything and I confirm that I only misunderstood the Wiki strictly rules. Now it's time to be more constructive and i will follow your suggestions. User:Angiolo77
I've noticed this too. I've given him now a first spam warning. Repetition will eventually lead to my blocking him. JoJan13:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The following paragraph from the article is horrible:
"After Lorenzo's death in 1492 and his son Piero's exile in 1494, the first period of Medici rule ended with the restoration of a republican government, influenced until his execution (1498) by the teachings of the radical Dominican prior Girolamo Savonarola, whose monomaniacal persecution of the widespread Florentine sodomy and of other worldly pleasures foreshadowed many of the wider religious controversies of the following centuries."
It is a non-sensical run-on sentence that might--and I stress MIGHT--be improved if the noun to which the pronoun "his"--as in "until his execution"--referred were clarified.
Feel free to be bold and try to edit it yourself. (Though don't do what I did the first time I ever edited something and end up distorting the whole page. XD) I'll take a gander at it. -WarthogDemon06:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
After talking about the San Lorenzo Chapel, the article states that "Nearby is the Uffizi,....".
In terms of relative distances, the duomo and Santa Maria Novella are much closer to San Lorenzo than the Uffizzi. I suggest that the article not say that the Uffizzi is nearby San Lorenzo. See fro example http://www.florence.ala.it/map.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.165.27.182 (talk) 00:03, 16 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]
I live in Florene. I think the part about Language is very funny!:)and it's true. we use to say "la Hoha Hola con la hannuccia horta horta"(it means Coke with short straw). In Italian I would say "la coca cola con la cannuccia corta corta".
ha ha! sorry for this stupid comment...
Am I the only one that finds the "Historic Centre of Florence" box awkward with its unusual photo of the city under a blanket of snow? (a rare sight indeed- however, better suited to a trivia section than a UNESCO infobox.) Mariokempes21:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I removed a statement placed in the text saying that Savonarola had a "monomaniacal persecution of pederasty" which also stated was "prevalent" in Florence of that day. The statement was sourced to a controversial book on pederasty, and was added by individuals who seek to find pederasty as a commonplace and accepted practice until religious authorities became oppressive.
The problem with such statements is that:
1) Savonarola was anything but monomaniacal, he inveighed againts prostitutes, homosexuals, women using cosmetics, the Medici, - his bonfire of the vanities burned paintings, books, cosmetics, statuary. It is incorrect to label him as monomaniacal. There is no need to stress his opposition to pederasty as opposed to his opposition to all sodomy.
2)Pederasty itself was not more prevalent or acceptable in pre-Savonarola Florence than in any other time. A painter such as Da Vinci was accused of sodomy before the interval where Florence was under the spell of Savonarola. Baroque1700 (talk) 23:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Doing this a bit of selfish reasons (^.^)... You think this picture is worth putting in somewhere in the article? Maybe not FP quality... Don't even know what you photo-pros out there think about it. If you think it could add something to the article but it need some editing, then I can do that (assuming that you give me fairly good instructions).
PS. Have NO idea how you add it to wikipedias servers/database/whatever, nor how you give it proper license-text/etc. :-/ Will require instructions for that too (provided you think it's worth something).
PureRumble 00:57, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Beautiful photo. Scroll to the top of your browser, look on the left side under the wikipedia logo, and below the search box you'll see a link to upload a picture. It is very easy. As long as you release the photo into the public domain it is usable. Whether other editors agree it belongs in the article is up to the other editors ;) DMorpheus (talk) 16:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is plenty of discussion of geography on this page, but very little on art. Hello: this "is" the city of art! Would someone like to start a "art in Florence" section please? There was one above and it seems to have been deleted. Why? Shall I put it back? History2007 (talk) 08:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, Since no one else was ready to do it, I put the material from the top of this section and started a new section on art. In the process, I realized that the "medieval spirit" is still so very alive in Florence, in that the Mayor is now suing Wikepedia for reporting that his wife is on the board of a parking company! [6]. So I did more searches using Italian sources and it seems that the Medici spirit is still alive in Florence, but alas I can not type any more here, for Wikipedia may get sued again. Let us just say that the "art of medieval dealings" is stil alive in Florence.... History2007 (talk) 03:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hy, I've added more information at the page. I'm a florentin and I know a lot of intresting things about the city... the only problem is that I don't speak a lot english, so I don't know if there are mistakes in grammar... can anyone check my informations? Thanks a lot! Mr. Nick46, 16.57 8 April 2008 (UTC)
This is an English language article so should only be edited by native English language speakers or those with equivalent lingusitic ability. The basic errors in English language and orthography is, frankly, embarassing and reflects poorly on this important subject. The linguistic errors are also causing inaccuracies in the historical and factual detail. This article badly needs tidied up to reach encyclopedia standard.
There are multiple examples which have turned this article into a poor quality inconsistent mix of "cut and paste", minor irrelevancies and inadequately expressed details.
The following are a few of the fundamental mistakes - and subjective opinions - which are detracting from the article's worth.
EG
(1)
"this cart, called from the florentines "Brindellone"
(2)
“Calcio in Costume”
The “Calcio storico fiorentino” (“Historic Florentin Football”), known also as “Calcio in costume”, is a sort of medieval sport and is known as the father of soccer even if it remebers more rugby.
It is an important manifestation began during the Middle Age with florentin nobles played with magnificent costumes (called also “Livree”).
The most important match was done at 17th February 1530, during the siege of Florence. In that day more papal troopses besiged the city and the florentines, with nonchalence, played at the game.
(3)
“Other Religious Manifestation”
Not only Florence has important religion manifestations. There are a lot of towns near the city with other religios manifestations. For example, in Signa, a town near Florence, there is the Festa della Beata Giovanna.
(4)
“Piazza San Lorenzo” has a namesake basilica with the second important dome in Florence, “the dome of Chapel of Princes” (“la Cappella dei Principi”). This square is famous for its beautiful market.
(5)
The “Basilica della Santissima Annunziata” is the sanctuary of St. Mary in Florence; the church, very dear to florentines, is collocate in the namesake square that is very famous in Tuscany. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.8.208 (talk) 12:06, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I undid a bunch of (what looked like) progressively destructive edits from 81.159.8.208 If I screwed up something let me knowWsvlqc (talk) 00:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If your native language is English then you will immediately appreciate the lingusitic corrections and improvements that I made; and not require an explanation.
The article is highly idiosyncratic and not worthy of encyclopedia standard. It is full of inaccuracies, subjective views and English language errors. Many sections are like trying to read a wall of graffiti. I have tried to make corrections to the most obvious mistakes and unusual elements. This is to be helpful and improve the article. A fundamental point is that this is the Englisdh language Wikipedia;. People with an inadequate grasp of the language should not be contributing and should concentrate on their respective Wikipedia version instead. I do not have the time to constantly edit and reedit. I, therefore, leave the article to those who deserve it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.8.208 (talk) 09:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hy, I'm Mr. Nick46 and I would like to replace to 81.159.8.208. I don't think that this page is idiosyncratic and It isn't in accordance with the encyclopedia standard. I'm a florentin that studies at one of the most important italian secondary school specializing in classic of Florence and, for this reason, I know a lot about the history and the culture of the city! I accept the criticisms about my spelling mistakes and I agree if you or somebody else changes the article in a better page, but I don't think that in the page there are subjective opinions. If you think that is not so, you can talk with me and we could do a better page! I available to do this! (I advise you that is better if you log to Wikipedia and only later you changes the pages. If you want to repleace me, do it to my talk page!). Mr. Nick46, 14 April, 17.37 (UTC)
Since WP likes to try to achieve an international flavor I think it is only fair the Italians should be allowed to try out their new English skills. After all, it is ttheir country. At the same time the Italians should understand English is not spoken or written the way they want to do it. It takes time to learn English, just as it takes time to learn Italian. So, I believe Mr. Nick's flexibility about the correction of his English is the best way. What we end up with is corrected broken English, but if it is corrected correctly, who's to know? Let's keep it a secret just between us.66.30.95.118 (talk) 05:13, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would be interested in seeing more on why the city is called Florence in English. I thought there was a time when the natives referred to the city as something like Florenza. (Perhaps this is the reference to Dante). There is a section in the Beijing article that describes the reason it was called Peking in English; could there be something similar here? Myrvin (talk) 15:37, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, in the evolution of Italian from Latin, the l becomes an i. For example, L. flos, floris, "flower", becomes fiore or fior. So, in the medieval names you are going to find transitional forms.66.30.95.118 (talk) 04:26, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Except, according to Pliny the Elder (Natural History III.5) the name of the city was based on it being between two rivers, and thus was Fluentia, not Florentia. For an explanation of this, see Bruni, History of the Florentine People, I.3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.68.162.122 (talk) 01:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that "Landmarks" and "Cityscape" sections were nearly the same. So I suppressed the latter; further details on maybe missing landmarks can be easily sought from the main category linked in the "Main sights" section which I renamed "Landmarks" to for compliance with most other articles. --Attilios (talk) 06:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, every city has a soccer club. Its bull **** to put this on the top of the page. Its just as pointless as saying florence has sidewalks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.57.32.101 (talk) 11:23, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Florence is the center of one of the biggest metropolitan areas in Italy. The total amount of population ("greater Florence") is about 1.506.098. As you can see here. Perhaps this must be add.......Bye ---Ricce (talk) 16:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
According to the link that figure is for the combined populations of three cities: Prato, Pistoia, and Firenze which do not form a metropolitan area. The population of Florence is 371,282 according to the ISTAT link, and the population of the entire province of Firenze is just under a million, again according to the ISTAT link. Maybe someone could remove that 1.5 million reference from the page? I tried and can't figure it out. I can't find the tilde on this foreign keyboard, my username is Zandrous.
I was looking at the Italian version of this page, and it is so much better! I've uploaded and translated some of the missing info. Tourism wasn't there, which was shocking really!--Theologiae (talk) 21:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A good thought, BUT. . . We're not really here to promote tourism! You've used Italian without translation in places, which may confuse some readers, and you seem not to have looked at the whole article carefully to ensure the new material does not duplicate what is already there. But your addition to the article's lists discloses a worse problem, not of your making--there is already significant duplication and prolix, unencyclopedic over-coverage because of the way embedded lists have developed. See WP:EMBED. The effect detracts from the overall ease of reading and comprehension, and a radical review seems necessary. Because this is a very important and frequently consulted article, I would welcome the opinion of other experienced editors on my views here. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 00:23, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No no, I don't mean promoting tourism, I mean to include a section on tourism. Since Florence is one of the world's greatest art capitals, it is suprising that the article is so short! The section gives people a brief way to know the museums of the city. I think it's good and helpful. However, yes, I totally agree that the article needs a total re-write. I mean its poor in comparison to how great a city Florence is. I think I'll just copy and translate 90% if not more of the Italian version, which is literally fantastic!
However, I disagree with your 'duplication' story. You say that there are three Boboli Garden sections (in your message), however, I see only one, the one I created. Anyway, the Italian wiki is just like that--Theologiae (talk) 13:55, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(I referred to 'mentions' and 'wikilinks', not 'sections'.) Feel free to work on it, but remember that Florence means different things to different people. Me, I like the people, especially this lipstick cop (pic):) So, English readers almost certainly won't look for the same info and 'spin' as Italians. Also, don't just reject the painstaking work of previous editors by substituting a translation. Why not work it up as a sandbox attached to your user page and give folks a look at it first? Cheers Bjenks (talk) 14:24, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but I'm not being now too radical about the Florence article. When I mean it needs a total re-write, I don't mean to cancel the whole article and start again, since that would be highly selfish. I mean to totelly re-write the landmarks/culture section, not deleting info, but carrying some extra info from the Italian wiki. Also, I know what you mean by Italians giving an overly enthusiastic and colloquial spin to their articles, however some of the 'promotional' info included in the Italian version which I have translated has been slightly neutralized. Anyway, good work and cheers! Please reply as soon as possible!--Theologiae (talk) 17:52, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For a better understanding of my view about replacing repetitive lists with prose, WP:EMBED check out the treatment of other cities. Eg, London, a much bigger city than Florence, covers 131kB and contains 222 citations. By creating Florence-style lists, its size could easily be doubled, but with the stultifying effect of making the content much harder to digest. Florence now fills 91kB and has 69 citations--very few of which relate to the woolly lists of buildings, museums, etc (most of which are already covered by linked specific articles). My point is that we need to reduce the volume of waffle and promotional content in order to make the article more encyclopedic, ie, useful, readable, succinct, quickly and easily digested, non-repetitive. Beware, too, of making the article into a cumbersome repository (WP:NOTREPOSITORY). Cheers Bjenks (talk) 19:01, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree, prose should be used, but info should not be deleted. Just put lists into prose. Also, I agree with you that encyclopedia articles have to be quick, but also detailed and long (simple english is used for a brief summary of the topic), since wikpedia is a serious encyclopaedia, not a quick and simply easy-to read holiday brochure. Cheers--Theologiae (talk) 20:23, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In 1944, the retreating Germans decided to blow up the bridges along the Arno linking the district of Oltrarno to the rest of the city, thus making it difficult for the British troops to cross.
This article strikes me as having a very biased tone, overall. It almost "comes across" as an ad for tourism in Florence.
I'm a little surprised that this hasn't been pointed out, as I honestly feel that it's one of the most biased articles - in terms of its overall "tone" - that I've yet come across on Wikipedia. I feel it shouldn't be necessary to cite examples of this; they practically leap off of the page at you with even a cursory perusal. However, one need only look (for example) at the actual history and behavior of the Medici family to realize that there is "more than one side to the story."
I feel that a neutral tone throughout the article would be more informative; and would resemble an encyclopedia article more closely than an advertisement to go visit Floronce. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.127.212.149 (talk) 05:47, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As a certain character in a film about Mafiosi done by a famous producer of Italian extraction said, "you think too much of us, kid." Believe me this issue has been fought and is being fought in a good many articles. The problem is, if the author or advocate is very determined and is backed up by one or more commercialized administrators, the "purist" (such as the likes of you and I) after a knock-down, drag-out battle, is forced off the article and in many cases off WP. So that is the explanation of that. Don't take Wales or anyone else very seriously when they talk about "non-commercial." There might be contributory transfers of cash you know nothing about. Might be, I say; I have no knowledge at that level. It sure is a pain, is it not? Either get used to it or get ready for battle. If you want an idea, look at the influence of private interests on the Congress of the US. The commercialists don't care a thing for your sensibilities; advertising comes first. If WP really wanted to stop it they would.66.30.95.118 (talk) 04:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The ford over the upper Arno was under Etruscan control from prehistoric times. There were Protovillanovan villages in the vicinity. As Villanovan Etruscans, however, they preferred the heights, so they placed their fort on an escarpment a few km away, which they then called Vipsul, known to us as Fiesole. Unfortunately for them Vipsul and the other north Etruscan cities involved themselves in the early Roman civil war, the struggle between Marius and Sulla. Sulla was the sort of man who looks for final solutions. He decimated the population of Vipsul, probably most of it, and drove the rest out, probably many into slavery (making a tidy profit). Then he gave the city over to the veterans, who rebuilt it along Roman lines. However, where the Etruscans had made a good living, the veterans did not. They came on hard times, so gradually they started moving down to the ford where previously were only villages. When there were enough of them the Romans founded Florentia there. Florentia waxed, Fiesole waned. Now Fiesole is a suburb for the wealthy with a great view of Florence. You ought to put this into a foundation section, but not in my sarcastic discussion style. You Italians learning English do it, and you outraged English speakers correct their grammar.66.30.95.118 (talk) 05:04, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Proportion of world's art in florence - does anyone know the statistic?
There is a statistic that I've read before about a certain percentage of the world's art by value being estimated to be in Florence, something like 1/3. Does anyone know what it is? Forgive me if its already in the article, but it would make an interesting addition to the lead. Jandrews23jandrews23 (talk) 16:03, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"when the papacy returned from the Babylonian Captivity"?????
As much as I enjoy Assassin's Creed II, I'm not sure the main character, Ezio Auditore merits a reference as a notable Florentine. I would love to learn more about the real person (if he existed), but the link to him leads you to a description of the video game character, which makes me think the reference not relevant. Thoughts?
— cyberbisson (talk) 17:20, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article was a in a really surprisingly poor state! Errors (in the order of the hundreds!) I found included the traditional POV and weasel word, a stupid copy-paste of entries in the main sights list, by which many landmarks started with "Palazzo XXXX is a palace in Florence, Italy etc", unsourced and useless blabberies about the dome, Dante, Brunelleschi, Chaucer, everyone! Hope the article is better now. --'''Attilios''' (talk) 11:57, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A good faith edit regarding one case of how Florence has been dealt with in fiction has been reverted. This does not mean that the information that has been added could on no account be included in Wikipedia. There is already the article London in fiction, and despite WP:Otherstuffexists, this is a strong indication that also an article Florence in fiction would be accepted. One could also create a subsection of this character in the article Florence, itself. I am sure that one would find enough material for it (one could begin with Giovanni Boccaccio's The Decameron). An other question is if the particular information that has been added to the article, in this case, at an other place would not possibly be rejected because its notability would be challenged. --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 10:49, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm doing some work to improve this, rather messy, article, which I have edited in the past and I, and for what I see, other people, feel needs improvement. I talked to User:Bjenks in the past, and I now think that it is clunky to have such a long and rather tedious list of monuments. However, it is, to some extent, useful information. I think it would be a good idea to move parts of the list onto a separate article, such as "List of tourist attractions in Florence" or "List of monuments in Florence", and reduce it into a well-written, decent length, summary for this article. Any opinions?
--&レア (talk) 14:02, 10 July 2011 (UTC) (Theologiae)[reply]
The "historical quarters" drawn map is soooo wrong: the shape of the city is drawn to be exactly the same of the modern town, which it wasn't: the city was much smaller, the four quarters correspond to what today is the historical center ("centro storico", Q1 in the administrative wards map on the right). Remove it or re-draw it.
Lostella (talk) 22:51, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What are your thoughts about removing all mention of the fashion-industry ranking system for cities that is cited in this article? As I have stated parenthetically in the fashion section of the article, it is based exclusively upon frequency of mention in global media outlets in a ranking system where financial revenues and industry influence are neither considered nor calculated by other means. Ctconnolly (talk) 06:24, 26 November 2011 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctconnolly (talk • contribs) 06:21, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am deleting the following from the fashion section of this page: "Florence has been ranked as the 31st main fashion capital of the world by the Global Language Monitor,[1] making it Italy's third most important fashion centre after Milan and Rome (based exclusively upon frequency of mention in global media outlets in a ranking system where financial revenues and industry influence are neither considered nor calculated by other means)." The non-parenthetical part seems to me more a self-promotion for the private company Global Language Network than a meaningful appraisal of Florence's influence in the global fashion industry. Discuss. Ctconnolly (talk) 19:01, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Should the following edit be removed from the fashion section: "Even opening up the Ferragamo museum in 1995, as an effort to glorify the Ferragamo fortune within its beloved place of Florence. The museum exhibits Ferragamo's artistic qualities as well as 10,000 of his timeless designs from the 1920s to 1960."? To me, it reads more like an advertisement than an encyclopedic entry. I feel it also gives too much attention to this individual company in this brief section. The company is already mentioned in the previous sentence due to its long continuous presence in Florence, and my belief that it is one of the most widely known fashion companies based in Florence. Discuss. Ctconnolly (talk) 05:57, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the two sentences relating to the Ferragamo museum. I feel it would be more appropriate to include this museum information in the Wikipedia article dedicated to the Ferragamo company, and not in a section of an article trying to briefly summarize the history and present of fashion in Florence.Ctconnolly (talk) 06:49, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Shortening, neutralising and re-writing of main sights section
The penultimate line of the history section says that Fleming College Florence shut down in 1977. I have no idea why that's there. Was this college an important part of life in Florence? I don't know but I'm guessing it wasn't. I don't see how its closure constitutes a historic event, so I think it should be removed. I don't want to do it myself in case somebody out there (maybe someone from Florence) knows more about it.
132.216.59.154 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:14, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Hardly understandable" is actually a bit of an understatement, and I have removed the section. I'd hope that anyone restoring the content would phrase it more clearly and include reliable sources so it can be verified. Rivertorch (talk) 17:18, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I feel that it is important to include the income tax rate that florentines pay in addition to the average income that is already given in this section, simply because I know they pay a lot in taxes, which I believe can go up to around 43%. Because of this, I think the average florentine is not as affluent as this article portrays. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinykim (talk • contribs) 06:19, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This could hardly be more trivial, but someone seems to think it's worth edit-warring over. Until recently the captions of two images here (correctly in my view) called the building that houses the Galleria degli Uffizi the "Uffizi". Trackteur has twice changed those captions to read Uffizi Gallery. I'm not going to revert again, but am faintly curious to know if anyone else has a view on this minor detail. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:11, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have just added archive links to one external link on Florence. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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.
I have just added archive links to 16 external links on Florence. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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.
I have just modified 5 external links on Florence. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
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.
I have just modified 3 external links on Florence. 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:
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.
I have just modified one external link on Florence. 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:
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.
I have just modified one external link on Florence. 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:
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.
I believe there are citations missing from the first few paragraphs of the History section. Paragraphs three, four and five are all missing citations. Other than that I think the page looks great. Bricks1988 (talk) 23:24, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
General thoughts:
The first thing I noticed was how personal the article sounded. "Once on the bus, the rider must stamp tickets (or swipe the Carta Agile) by using the machines on board, unlike train tickets, which must be validated before boarding." It could be switched to something like... "Bus systems use stamps onboard while train ticketing..." Although I don't think the information is that important in the first place unless there is something more specific- this should perhaps be left for a tourist guide?
I was confused by the first paragraph in general. I would perhaps just discuss the bus system and maybe point out major points of transit.. and go into detail if there are any interesting or different means of transit. For instance, San Francisco is well known for streetcars or the implementation of a bullet train from SF to LA would be an interesting point to talk about. The section about the airport is relatively small. Maybe there is more information there?
In general there were some grammatical errors as well as things that did not sound like an encyclopedia. miar 05:45, 1 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaridgway (talk • contribs)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
Hmm. File page at Commons claims it's used in this article… but it's not, AFAICT (nor in the corresponding Wikidata item). Same thing for Rome, the second article the file page claims it's used on. I didn't check the rest. - dcljr (talk) 04:21, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
to many nonsense pictures, too much information on biycle renting, too many "important" people of Florence like authors of children's books, singers who had one hit in the 80s, Florence Nightingale who was just born there...and then of course there is Dante, Alberti, Botticelli, Machiavelli... MenkinAlRire17:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Again, of 7 pictures in the info box, three were taken in the evening or by night, when it is dark. It might not be clear that this is not the best time to make a picture of something you want to show, except you want to show an 'atmosphere'. But atmosphere is not informative, not really, it's emotional. Wiki is not part of social media, it's an encyclopedia, it deals with data, factual knowledge, and there is nothing to sell. MenkinAlRire21:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, city articles cater to a wide popular audience, & this stuff creeps in. Was the multiple image ever discussed? I doubt it. It should probably just be removed. Yes, nightime photos are almost always a bad idea. Johnbod (talk) 21:48, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree all night photos of buildings should be removed in the infobox and in the gallery. I have nothing against infoboxes or with collages in them, but the photo of the "Florence skyline" at late evening and the nighttime photos of the Uffizi Gallery and the Palazzo Vecchio should be removed. I appreciate them aesthetically—they are dramatic—but as MenkinAlRire suggests, they are atmospheric and not encyclopedic in effect. Carlstak (talk) 20:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to remove the citation template from the history section. There's nothing in here to explain why the citations were listed, but as there are quite a few citations already I've decided to remove this.
Took this photo from the Duomo terrace. It's FP on Commons and might be a good addition to the article (not one of the typical views). There are already many images in the article, though, so dropping here for others to decide. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 19:13, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)