Talk:City of San Marino

European Microstates: San Marino Top‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Microstates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of European Microstates 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.European MicrostatesWikipedia:WikiProject European MicrostatesTemplate:WikiProject European MicrostatesEuropean Microstates
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject San Marino (assessed as Top-importance).

Cities: National capitals

	Cities portal 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
	This article is supported by the project's national capital taskforce.

Comments

In Italian Language its official name is Città di San Marino nicknamed "The city" by locals, ergo in English: ===>City of San Marino.
Not San Marino, San Marino! --Nickel Chromo (talk) 07:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Italian language, all cities have an official denomination Città/Comune di <insert city name here>', except for a few exceptions, such as Municipio di Marsala. Of course, this doesn't necessarily mean Rome should be called Comune di Roma... --Angelo (talk) 12:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Largest cities

"Borgo Maggiore .. is the third largest city in the country, after Dogana and Borgo Maggiore". This makes no sense. What are the three largest cities, in order? Maproom (talk) 15:35, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on City of San Marino. 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://archive.is/20120803071811/http://www.giuntedicastello.sm/index.php?id=12 to http://www.giuntedicastello.sm/index.php?id=12

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:26, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 November 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved per WP:SNOW. It is clear the article is not going to be moved to the proposed title. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:14, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

City of San Marino → San Marino (capital) – San Marino is the capital of the country of San Marino. The BBC, CIA, and Britannica all have the capital listed as San Marino, not the "City of San Marino". I think it is more reasonable that the title of the article of the city of San Marino be called San Marino without the city. 2601:183:101:58D0:E4CB:E2FB:3667:6B35 (talk) 13:07, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. San Marino is an independent city-state, so I don't believe that moving the page to the title with that exact identifier is a good idea at all. ToThAc (talk) 17:40, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose move as bad disambiguation. It may make sense to go with San Marino (city), but I believe the better option for now is to keep it at its current title. ONR (talk) 23:27, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per the above. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:15, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and snow/speedy close In ictu oculi (talk) 15:26, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It's not at all clear that the current title is actually problematic — we title things on Wikipedia with their common name, not necessarily their official one, and nominator hasn't provided any evidence that "City of San Marino" isn't a normal and common way of disambiguating the city from the country. But even if this were to get moved, the correct parenthetical disambiguator would be "(city)", not "(capital)". So I'd be willing to consider a substantive nomination to move this to the "(city)" form, but "(capital)" isn't the appropriate choice. Bearcat (talk) 16:57, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 20 November 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. No clear consensus on where to move this to, and a substantial number of editors prefer the existing title. (closed by page mover) Brad v 13:41, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

City of San Marino → ? – I previously suggested moving the current page title from City of San Marino to San Marino (capital), but everyone opposed the move. A few of you suggested moving the page to San Marino (city), so I want to know if anyone is interested in moving the page to San Marino (city) or possibly San Marino, San Marino 2601:183:101:58D0:9159:407:BB05:205B (talk) 22:07, 20 November 2017 (UTC)--Relisting. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 18:27, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support San Marino (city), but oppose San Marino, San Marino per my previous statements. Parenthetical disambiguation is better than redundant disambiguation. ONR (talk) 05:09, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Old Naval Rooftops: @Necrothesp: @Bearcat: @AjaxSmack: gentlemen, are you sure that the San Marino in California is not a city? In ictu oculi (talk) 17:44, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking only for myself, that's not what I said. What I said is that the naming conventions for US cities mean that the one in California could never have this title, and few if any readers would ever expect it to — so a hatnote should be enough to catch the rare exception. Bearcat (talk) 18:29, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bearcat: but how do readers as opposed to editors know that (city) doesn't mean the city they know? Our titling is meant to help readers not editors. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:30, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because readers expect most articles about US cities to be at "City, State" rather than "City (city)". Bearcat (talk) 22:22, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, San Marino, California, is a city; it is the "City of San Marino", which damns the current title of this article as well. Luckily, the capital of San Marino is the primary topic per long-term significance and hatnotes are cheap. — AjaxSmack 04:50, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's not what I said either. I said as a national capital this is the primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:49, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now? This is a tiny, tiny city that's dwarfed by the California city, so it's tricky to find sources, and what sources do exist almost exclusively talk about tourism in the entire country rather than the city. Anwyay, it might be citogenesis, but https://www.tripadvisor.com/Tourism-g187809-City_of_San_Marino-Vacations.html uses "City of San Marino", so would want to see more proof that this term isn't used first. SnowFire (talk) 08:44, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support San Marino (city). The current title (with caps C "City") is not all that common. A Google search of "the capital of San Marino is" -wikipedia gives a variety renditions. Oppose San Marino, San Marino. — AjaxSmack 02:25, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support San Marino (city), our usual solution in situations like this. It may be a lot smaller than the Californian city, but I think as a national capital it is primary. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:06, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support San Marino (city). Since the usual naming convention for US cities is "City, State", very few users would expect that title to lead to the California city instead regardless of size — so a hatnote should be enough to catch the one in 100 who might get confused. Agree that disambiguating a city that has the same name as its larger country or subnational division as "San Marino, San Marino" (or "New York, New York", etc.) isn't useful. Bearcat (talk) 17:06, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:NATURAL. Ambivalent on SM,SM Red Slash 16:39, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there some evidence that "City of San Marino" is actually a common enough usage to satisfy NATURAL? Bearcat (talk) 20:58, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just occurred to me; we can't name it San Marino (city) because that's not specific enough. A parenthetical disambiguator in a title must always refer to precisely one topic; see Thriller (Michael Jackson album) as an example. Red Slash 13:59, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the resistance to partial dabs is probably one of the dumbest rules-for-the-sake-of-rules we have on WP. The notion that Thriller (album) somehow does not meet WP:CRITERIA better than Thriller (Michael Jackson album), or that Titanic (1997 film) is somehow better than Titanic (film), is ludicrous. --В²C ☎ 18:07, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And let's not forget the effort make this rule about partial dabs a guideline failed; WP:PDAB is an essay. --В²C ☎ 18:37, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose San Marino (city). We very rarely use parenthetical disambiguation that is not precise and we definitely never do it in a case like this where the topic it would ambiguous with (San Marino, California) is actually a more 'primary' topic. See e.g. page views where the California city averages about 20% more views that this article. Ambivalent about other proposed title as long as they are unambiguous. Jenks24 (talk) 10:08, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support for San Marino (city). This is an unusual but ideal use of the city disambiguator, like Cork (city). I disagree with the position that disambiguated titles can't have primary topics. In this case, there is only one widely recognized city named San Marino, so it's obvious that if San Marino is disambiguated with plain city, it must be this one. --В²C ☎ 03:07, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- How do you come to the conclusion that this city is more widely known when it gets less page views? Even if disambiguated titles can have primary topics, this article is clearly not a primary topic for "San Marino (city)" by any metric I can see. Jenks24 (talk) 03:27, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - That this topic is the primary topic of San Marino (city) is well established, as San Marino (city) has been a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to this article since its creation almost a decade ago. But there is policy basis for it as well... a topic is primary for a term with respect to long-term significance if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term. It's a wash by usage/page views, but this one wins hands down by historical significance. --В²C ☎ 05:59, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - This is the most un-B2C comment I can recall seeing. Jenks24 (talk) 09:13, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - LOL! It's an unusual situation. But generally I have no issues with falling back on historical significance when usage criteria does not indicate a clear primary topic, especially in what is essentially a WP:TWODABS situation. My longstanding beef with historical significance is primarily about it being used to trump usage criteria. It should be a fallback tie breaker, like in this case. --В²C ☎ 18:02, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (city), as Red Flash says. Apart from anything else it will immediately be overturned at Move Review for violating just about every part of WP:TITLE. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:41, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support San Marino (city) – the city of San Marino in the Republic of San Marino is far more notable than the city in Los Angeles County, California. We can use a hatnote to point to the California city. CookieMonster755 𝚨-𝛀 00:35, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The present name is fine. Using "(city)" completely fails at disambiguation, what with San Marino, California, also being a city. I can't believe this many people are supporting "(city)"; it's like they did not even read the discussion. 'Since the usual naming convention for US cities is "City, State", very few users would expect that title to lead to the California city instead ...' What?! That's completely nonsensical. Maybe very few users who memorize WP:USPLACE would, but we cannot even contemplate assuming that our readers have absorbed every nuance of our naming conventions, which are in flux all the time anyway. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ< 12:19, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- The present name is equally ambiguous as the California city is also the "City of San Marino". At least the proposed title is more common and a hatnote should take care of the rest. — AjaxSmack 15:32, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't think it is, because no one calls SM, CA "City of San Marino" (that is not actually the name of the city, that's the name of the city government as a legal entity, and we are not going to have an article on that; if someone tried to create one, we'd merge it into the city article). Meanwhile, the place in Italy is literally named Città di San Marino according to our article, which translates to "City of San Marino" or "San Marino City", in distinction to the republic. So, it's case like New York City, Culver City, Ciudad de Juarez, Ciudad México, etc., etc. PS: Note also that our articles like San Marino treat City of San Marino as a proper name, with capitalized "City" in mid-sentence. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ< 23:59, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Then what other alternative is there that resolves the ambiguity? Literally the only title this article could possibly be given that doesn't remain ambiguous with the San Marino in California is "San Marino, San Marino", but our rules also unequivocally preclude redundant disambiguation — so that option is entirely unavailable. Maybe the proposed title is ambiguous with San Marino CA, but the existing title is ambiguous with San Marino CA too — so the present name is not fine if the proposed name isn't, because they both present the same issue. So what other new title would you propose?
  And yes, readers are aware of how our naming conventions work — they don't have to be familiar with all the nuances of our policy statements to be able to observe that every town or city in the entire United States is located at "X, State" except for a few big metropolitan cities that are famous and prominent enough to be at just "X". A person can easily observe the reality of what the page titles are without having to know all the ins and outs of our internal policy statements about why they are what they are. Bearcat (talk) 17:41, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - San Marino, Republic of San Marino? It just can't be San Marino (city), because that won't make sense to readers. Again, the current name is fine, because no one calls a US city "the City of Foo", ever. That construction is only used for the legal entity of the municipal government – the bureaucracy demanding you pay your parking ticket, not the geographical place in which people live. If you tried to move into the (US) "City of San Marino", you'd be arrested for squatting in a government office building. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ< 23:55, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - "because no one calls a US city "the City of Foo", ever". Not true. Los Angeles, for example, is commonly referred to as "the City of Los Angeles", presumably to distinguish it from "the County of Los Angeles". Sorry, but the notion that "City of San Marino" distinguishes this San Marino from the California one better than San Marino (city) does is silly. The problem with the current title is that it does not reflect a WP:COMMONNAME - reliable sources rarely if ever refer to it as "City of San Marino". The proposed title does not suffer this problem, though it's no better at distinguishing from the California city, that's not the issue being addressed by this RM. And since this San Marino is arguably the primary topic (wash by usage; hands down by historical significance) it's not a problem that needs addressing. --В²C ☎ 20:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - The City of Angels. Heard not uncommonly. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:21, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - The common American usage is Baltimore City/Baltimore County to disambiguate (similarly for St. Louis). "Los Angeles" always refers to the city or metropolitan area, it's Los Angeles County on the infrequent occasions that entity needs to be referred to. City of New Orleans (song) and USS City of Corpus Christi (SSN-705) are examples of the "City of Foo" styling, but those are referring to things named after the city, not the cities directly. power~enwiki (π, ν)
Weak Support San Marino, San Marino. The "City of Foo" usage is somewhat common on Wikipedia in this scenario (City of Brussels) but also awkward, and the (city) disambiguation suffers due to the existence of San Marino, California. San Marino, San Marino has none of those flaws. I'm not familiar enough with the topic to determine whether a merge with San Marino would be feasible. power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:57, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Vague proposal. No detail, no compelling rationale, no clear statement as to what is wrong with the current title. https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citt%C3%A0_di_San_Marino is good enough for the Italians, leave it alone. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:06, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose any move. This is an article about a unique place and cannot be covered by guidelines or expected to set any sort of precedent. If it weren't primary topic of the current name there would be a problem, but it is so there isn't. The current name works well for readers, and none of the alternative suggestions would work as well, let alone be an improvement. Andrewa (talk) 23:03, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on City of San Marino. 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/20090805215911/http://www.elezioni.sm/index.php?id=299 to http://www.elezioni.sm/index.php?id=299

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:12, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Memory 1944.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:52, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 December 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No move. Consensus is that the present title is sufficient natural disambiguation. Cúchullain ^t/c 17:58, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

City of San Marino → San Marino (city) – The common name for the city is San Marino rather than City of San Marino. Interstellarity (talk) 13:18, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, "City of San Marino" is the WP:NATURALDIS from San Marino. The city website and seal has the title "The City of San Marino" so it is clearly in common use as well. Cerebral726 (talk) 14:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cerebral, and also this is incomplete disambiguation. Nohomersryan (talk) 18:23, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:COMMONNAME.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Nohomersryan also note that although Britannica does use "San Marino" the search suggestions use "San Marino City". Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:07, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support San Marino (city) or San Marino City per CommonName. (t · c) buidhe 04:58, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:NATURAL and per it:Città di San Marino, the natural name on the native language Wikipedia. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:28, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:10, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern about image in infobox

The infobox contains an image of the aerial cablecar, but it overlooks Borgo Maggiore, not the City of San Marino. I notice that when I hover over a link to the City of San Marino, the aerial cablecar is the default image. Would it not be appropriate to replace this image with one that captures the aerial cablecar in the City itself, or some other photo of CSM? IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 12:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]