Talk:Switzerland/Archive 6

Swiss franc vs Swiss Frank

made small change to the currency ( original saying swiss franc, changed to swiss franks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.90.247 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 16 January 2006

... and I reverted it, since "franc" is the correct English spelling. Schutz 15:22, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

On the path to featured article ?

The article has been relatively stable for quite some time now; we could maybe think about bringing it to featured article status ? In any case, there are a few things that should be done even before starting a peer review, including: (please complete list, or strike if done): Schutz 20:23, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

• Inline citations. Schutz
• Fact check and general work-over. Lupo
  • As an example, take the "History" section: it's first paragraph currently says "At the Battle of Morgarten on November 15, 1315, the Swiss defeated the Habsburg army and secured quasi-independence as the Swiss Confederation." I'm not sure that this is correct. It wasn't until the battle of Sempach that they had firmly established themselves as an entity the Habsburgs couldn't squash. Also, they were not "quasi-independent". They were (and would be until 1648) a part of the Holy Roman Empire; all they achieved before was maintaining, ensuring, or gaining a status as reichsfrei regions. After the Swabian War, the situation was ambiguous: formally still a part of the empire, yet certainly "reichsfrei", they were even exempt from the jurisdiction of the Reichskammergericht, the supreme court of the empire. But they became a formally independent nation only in 1648.
  • Another minor example: the mention of the ancien régime two paragraphs down the page, in the context of neutrality. That doesn't make much sense just like that. I haven't yet gotten around to rewrite the article Ancien Régime of Switzerland, but it should be noted that the Swiss "neutrality" (a) did not prevent the Swiss cantons to have mercenary troops fighting on all sides in Europe, and (b) the lack of military operations on their own behalf can be explained by two factors: on the one hand, the Swiss' military supremacy had waned with the advent of heavy artillery, and on the other hand, common foreign politics of the cantons during much of the time of the ancien régime was effectively paralyzed by the tensions between Catholic and Protestant cantons (which, as the article rightly points out, led to the religiosly motivated battles of Villmergen).
  • I haven't looked in detail at the rest of the article, but I think we still have a long way to go to get this up to FA quality. Lupo 10:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough; even if we don't get there in the near future, it is still good to start improving... Schutz 10:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

What if a Swazi visited Switzerland and a Swiss visited Swaziland?

I'd like to know how each of them would react, and what they'd say. Factor how they live in their home countries to how they'd describe their visiting countries.

Their country names sounded similar, so I thought I'd ask.--Shultz 14:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Is this homework? Lupo 15:09, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

not even; the names are entirely unrelated, one to Schwyz and the other to siSwati, what teacher would ask something like this as homework?? dab (ᛏ) 15:42, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

To Compare & Contrast. Would someone care to let us know, please? I can't get it out of my head until I get answers, sorry. --Shultz 15:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

we've answered it, haven't we? there is no connection whatsoever. dab (ᛏ) 16:40, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

No, no. I mean, if a Swazi took a trip to Switzerland, and a Swiss took a trip to Swaziland, what would they possibly say about the countries they visit? --Shultz 17:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

what? What's the difference from, say, a Swiss taking a trip to Zimbabwe, or a Swazi taking a trip to the Netherlands? They are not going to confuse their nations if that's what you mean. Maybe you should ask, rather, what will happen if George W. Bush visited either Swaziland or Switzerland, but I doubt the similarity of names makes a difference there, the man can hardly keep track of what continent he is on. dab (ᛏ) 17:41, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Look, I've been wondering for YEARS about it, because Switzerland and Swaziland sounds SO SIMILAR. Because of this, I've wanted to know what they'd find better, worse, and brand new to them about the countries they visit. I've asked the Ref Desk. Hopefully they'll provide something useful and to the point. If you want to do better and post your answer here, be my guest (or you could post your answer there too I guess). --Shultz 10:52, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

that's fine, maybe you'll get an answer to your satisfaction. Note that the similarity exists only in English. Swaziland doesn't sound extremely similar to Suisse or Schweiz or Svizzera. dab (ᛏ) 11:25, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia article talk pages are for discussing the content of articles. They shouldn't really be used for off-the-wall chat, like this and also [1]. You've also created goofy redirects in the past ("Judenmouse" redirecting to Judenrat). -- Curps 16:03, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

such questions are, however, welcome at WP:RD. And if people are willing to answer them on talkpages, why not ask? dab (ᛏ) 16:40, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge with Voting in Switzerland

It has been suggested that Voting in Switzerland be merged to this article. I think that it should be inserted under Direct Democracy as a stub but still retained as its own article. The Switzerland article is quite long as is. What does everyone think? Hdstubbs 19:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that sounds right. Add a blurb & continue to link to main article. ¦ Reisio 20:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me; I think there is too much material to cover (with 23 or 26 voting systems with subtle differences...) to integrate it completely in the main article. Schutz 20:23, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

It should be made sub-article of Politics of Switzerland and Swiss Federal Constitution. The article is lacking sources, and should make clear which procedures are constitutional and which are simply which are cantonal, and which are merely communal, incidential or projected (such as internet voting). I'd say it merits a cleanup tag. dab (ᛏ) 21:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that it would make a good sub-article under Politics of Switzerland but I disagree it merits a clean-up tag; I know it needs work but it isn't that bad. There are several users actively working on the article and putting a cleanup tag is like putting up a sign next to a construction worker that says, "Keep Working". Hdstubbs 01:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

A yes, I agree of course; I had thought the article had been found abandoned :) dab (ᛏ) 11:23, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Unus pro omnibus, omnes pro uno

Nice work, by the way, I've only seen this now. These things are what make Wikipedia so extremely cool (and addictive). dab (ᛏ) 11:46, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion, ideas

I think there are better pictures for Switzerland. For example, the picture of the Swiss Alps. Also a section dedicated to "Swiss values" could be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.234.208 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 8 February 2006

I like the current pictures (the Federal Palace one is a bit grey, but we have plenty of other that we can use instead if needed), but agree that we could do with a few more. As for the Alps, there is a picture of the Matterhorn in the relevant article, but this may be a bit too much of a cliché. As for the "Swiss values", I am a bit worried that it may be subjective and hard to link to a primary source. Even information from polls or votations would not give us more information because it is difficult to second-guess the reasons or values behind a person's choice. Did you have anything particular in mind ? Schutz 18:30, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

For one, Switzerland's well-known humanitarian tradition. Neutrality, the rule by consensus, ethnic and linguistic pluralism also comes to mind (including protection of minorities), and finally cleanness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.234.208 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 15 October 2006

Wikipedia:German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board

This new notice board might be of interest to editors here. You can help with our current projects or ask for help with yours, and ask any related question on our talk page. Hope to see you there, Kusma (討論) 15:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Culture

WTF? What does this list of clichés do in this article:

The Swiss are noted for their banks, their chocolate, their cheese, their pocket knives, their watches (particularly the famous Rolex and the Swatch), their private boarding schools and their strengths in engineering and the sciences.

The first is superfluous, there's already a link to Swiss bank in the "Economy" section. The next six are famous export products, but hardly a cultural factor. Boarding schools would deserve a minor mention in Education in Switzerland, but also have nothing whatsoever to do with culture. I suggest we remove the whole phrase. Lupo 21:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed. Lupo 08:44, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Other page

Is there a Swiss laws page? JP 14:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

There is category Category:Swiss law, but it does not contain that many entries (including a brand new page on Copyright law). Are you looking for something in particular ? Schutz 15:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Why did the Nazis not invade?

According to the article, a major reason the Nazis didn't invade Switzerland during the WWII was the trade with Swiss Banks:

.... Modern historical findings, such as the research done by the Bergier commission, indicate that another major factor [in causing the Nazis not to invade] was the continued trade by Swiss banks with Nazi Germany.

Is there any serious backing for this view? Surely the Nazis could go on using Swiss banking facilities just as effectively after they had invaded? It seems to me to be an extraordinary claim that is not, to my knowledge, backed up by the Bergier report, and I think more detail and citations are needed if this claim is going to stand in the article. Enchanter 16:12, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

there is a very good book called Target Switzerland, which covers in detail the german preperations for invading switzerland and the swiss response, which included giving up 2/3rds fo the country to fight from a national redoubt located in the Alps. from what iremember these plans continued right up until 194, Hitler always considered parts of switzerland as part of the greater german empire.

I thinkt he the reason why it never happened is it was constantly beign delayed due to other operation, and the impression was, that switzerland was not going to be going anywhere in the mean time. will see if i can dig up some more info, rather from what i can jsut remember from the book.

so stupid

we have something on this on Switzerland during the World Wars. The upshot is that trading with the Nazis was one factor, among others, for the delay of the invasion. Of course, later in the war, the Nazis had more pressing matters on their hands (their crumbling empire), if the war had gone their way, they would have invaded at some point, it was just that the combination of Swiss business making the invasion less than urgent, and Swiss defense preparations making it less than trivial. dab (ᛏ) 09:35, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Why don't you look at Operation Tannenbaum. This was the planned operation to invade Switzerland. Hitler quoted that he would "Butcher the Swiss". Jean-Paul 09:41, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

• ONE reason (among many) is that Switzerland was too mountainous to be of any great interest to anyone.

indeed. practically Afghanistan. Especially the juicy factories and gold vaults in the Swiss plateau. dab (ᛏ) 00:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Easy. Most of the Swiss were Germans, they held the money for the Nazis, and the allies could not touch them. It's pretty smart... evil, but smart.

-G

I've removed this sentence from the article:

Research done by the Bergier commission, shows another major factor may have been trade by Swiss banks with Nazi Germany.

The reason for the removal is that, to my knowledge, the Bergier commission does not make this assertion.

I must emphasise that there is simply no obvious reason why, even if Swiss banks fully cooperated with the Nazis, that this would somehow be an obvious reason why they would not invade. Quoting a report which criticises the behaviour of Swiss banks comes nowhere close to corroborating an assertion about why Hitler might not have ordered an invasion. Enchanter 23:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Thr map is weird.

Serbia and montenegro are still unified with the north seperate for some reason, and holland is split in two. doesn't seem to conform to the way all other location maps are shown. very strange. can someone fix it? Pure inuyasha 02:20, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

well spotted. This was inherited from Image:Europe_blank_map.png, which seems to be fixed now. This map should be fixed too, if anyone can be bothered. dab (ᛏ) 00:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Template:Swiss Confederation

What is the point of putting the infobox in the template {{Swiss Confederation}} ? It is unlikely to be used in any other article, so that I don't really see any benefit ?? Schutz 17:31, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Sometimes used anyway when e.g. pages get spacious. Odengatan 10:57, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

It's something that is done once in a while, possible a confusion about the way templates work. One or two similar templates were deleted some time ago. I reverted the addition to Switzerland for now. -- User:Docu

Ok. I'll leave a message on the author's talk page, and will then list the template on WP:TFD — keeping the template around will be confusing if the infobox is modified but not the template, or vice-versa. Schutz 08:39, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Not to be confused with...

As the teacher pinpoints, don't confuse Switzerland with Sweden, as many people do. (Yes, it is a very common mistake, believe it or not.)
Shandris^{the azylean} 01:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, and don't confuse the King of Sweden with the King of Switzerland. -- User:Docu

Cause Switzerland ain't some monarchy, man! Shandris^{the azylean} 11:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I can believe it very easily... unfortunately, I also believe that the image you added to this page is a copyright violation: as a fair use image (with dubious fair use rationale), it should not be placed on a talk page. Sorry about that. Schutz 13:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Swiss Italian

In the opening paragraph, the article gives the names of Swiss people (ie a Swiss male) in the various languages (Swiss French, Swiss German). However, where the article mentions 'Swiss Italian', the link is to the Italian language and not a Swiss Italian dialect. To the best of my knowledge, there is no difference between the Italian spoken in Switzerland and the standard version. I could be wrong, so I thought better of changing 'Swiss Italian' to just 'Italian' without mentioning it on the talk page. I shall make the aforementioned change, but if anyone knows of a difference, could they please make the link to 'Swiss Italian' (The article will appear maroon, so an article on Swiss Italian would need to be started). Nicholassharland 12:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Hallo Nicholassharland. I am myself of swiss-italian origins. Of course the standard-Italian, that people use for official communication is not different to the normal Italien used in Italy, although sometimes the use of words may be different sometimes. As a general rule, you can compare the situation to the relation between Swiss German and Standard-German. As in Swiss German the dialects spoken in different valleys are very different. Then the dialects in the Grisons are much more appart from standart Italian as the dialects in the Ticino. In the Ticino dialects are also sometimes socialects, what does not occure with Swiss German. To illustrate the difference between standard Italian and the dialect of Poschiavo:

Standard Italian: – Dialect of Poschiavo, Puschiavin'

giorno – diu

latte – lait

muro – mür

buttero – buttèr

notte – noit

I myself am not a specialist with languages, so unfortunately I cannot start a new article. But I'm pretty shure, somebody will start one soon. Sidonius 12:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

WP has articles on Ticinese and Lombard, but nothing specifically on Pus'ciavin or the Mesolcina and Bregaglia variants thereof. I don't know whether "Swiss Italian" is commonly used in linguistics or everyday speech. ---Sluzzelin 17:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you both. In that case, how come there was a 'Swiis Italian' translation of Switzerland? was it in one of the aforementioned dialects, or in Standard Italian?

Just to make it clear - there are special Swiss Italian dialects, but the term "Swiss-Italian" ist unknown in Switzerland. One would never translate any official documents using an italian Dialect. The only place where you can find officialy used dialect is in the maps of the federal topographic bureau (swisstopo): names are mostly used in there local dialect form. Ciao, Sidonius 13:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

If in one of the dialects, could you mention which one on the main article and include the translations into Standard Italian and other dialects. If in normal Italian, then mention of the dialects will be useful. Nicholassharland 15:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

External links

Why the distinction between official links and other links? Switzerland-in-sight for example is produced by an official body of the government... I suggest we get rid of the two subheadings, unless somebody convinces me otherwise. Kokiri 21:57, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The distinction somehow came with the template, .. two other links are also somehow official. Besides, I agree with you. -- User:Docu

SWITZERLAND IN SOUND: I added my website as an external link, only to have it removed repeatedly. I keep putting it back! www.switzerlandinsound.com is the only source of serious radio-type reports about Switzerland since the closing of Swiss Radio International (now text-based "Swissinfo"), where I worked for 32 years! My site is professional, and offers supplementary information in a user-friendly form not found elsewhere. I don't know who is responsible for removing my link, but I ask you to stop. Better yet, please actually visit the site first! Bob Zanotti Founder and Editor www.switzerlandinsouond.com

But it is spam. Why is it encyclopedic? Wikipedia is not a web directory. Your site is not relevant to THIS article. and remember about the Wikipedia WP:3RR three revert rule. The external link don't provide link to good sites, but to site with more information about the article, -- Cate 13:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're talking rubbish. I also assume you are the one taking responsibility for deleting my entry and deciding for all others what is relevent. I doubt you have even checked the content of SIS. If you did, your naive, rhetorical question and remarks would be answered. I am one of the most experienced English-speaking journalists in Switzerland, and reported on this country at Swiss Radio International for 32 years. What right do you have - whoever you are - to question the authority of my work! Your deletions of my link are vandalism, pure and simple. If you want to continue this debate, contact me at the contact address listed on the SIS website. In any case, keep your hands off my link! There are other links of a similar nature that you leave alone. Why is that? What do you have against me and/or SIS? If this is the way Wikipedia works, I see a dim future for it. Bob Zanotti, www.switzerlandinsound.com

Wikipedia does indeed work like this: inflated egos are punctured by the wiki hivemind :) We discourage the addition of links by site maintainers. If your site is really extremely important to Switzerland in general, you should trust it will be added by a neutral party. Any other approach, and Wikipedia would turn into a link-farm in a matter of weeks, which most people would consider a dim future indeed. Your link may stand much better chances on Swiss journalism or Swiss Radio or similar, but you'd have to write these articles first (please do!) dab (ᛏ) 20:59, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Dear DBachmann, You are talking to me as though I were an amateur. I doubt that the other iinks under "Switzerland" were put there by well-meaning "volunteers". It is up to the public to decide on the merit of links, not self-appointed "editors". What I am doing on SIS is the continuation of the radio tradition of Swiss Radio International, which is now dead. SIS is the only source of serious English-language audio reporting from Switzerland. One year ago, the NZZ ran a very favaborable article about SIS. In the2 years that SIS has been in existence, it has received nothing but priase from professional people. That's good enough for me! BZ SIS

I am talking to you as if you were inexperienced with Wikipedia, which you apparently are. "the public" and "self-appointed editors" are equivalent here. If you find links listed that you want to argue are inappropriate or irrelevant, you are free to remove them, and see what other people have to say for keeping them. Now before you try out the line of argument that if your link cannot be here, all the others should not be either, I would ask you to please be aware of WP:POINT. I do not think your link is terrible, and I kept it under "media" for now. But it is obvious that this is a commercial link, and that you are acting in your own personal interest here: you want to increase traffic to your site. If you are that interested in getting SIS covered on Wikipedia, why don't you invest 20 minutes and write a full Switzerland in Sound article? dab (ᛏ) 07:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

BTW I never removed your link. I was telling a possible cause. But I see that you insist on the high quality of your site (which really is not very relevant to the discussion), instead of tell us why you think your site is relevant to this article! And it seems that your anwser are too arrogant, which don't help you. So, to repeat: Why do you think the link is relevant to this article? (I think that 30% of the link in wikipedia are spam and not usefull) Cate 08:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't see this as a court of law or a professional inquisition. Anyone who bothers to actually visit SIS and evaluate it (as the NZZ did: (http://www.nzz.ch/2005/08/12/em/articleD167X.html) can draw their own conclusion, which I believe will confirm my "arrogant" position. The website is full of experienced, qualified insight and interpretation of this country and society - just look at the "Features" and "Interesting People" for starters. All this supplements the article. Let me "turn the stick around" and suggest that it is "arrogant" to assume and believe that the article says it all and represents ultimate authority! In the meantime, someone has reorganized the External Links (very well, I think), and I see that SIS has survived. I am curious why you and other critics don't question the other links. Why single me out? Is it the ".com" that troubles you? I don't make a penny on SIS, nor do the contributors. It is a work of love and conviction! BZ SIS

I am not singling you out. You are singling out this article, for the addition of your link. Your website is great. I'm not into listening to audio records online, but I am sure it is a very nice site for people that are. But tell us again why it is so imperative that the Wikipedia article on Switzerland link to it? I am neutral here: I did not remove your link, nor will I restore it if others do remove it. I agree it may be listed under "media" here. Does it absolutely need to be listed as one or two links concerned with "Swiss media"? I don't think so. Again, you are welcome to write Swiss media or similar, where the link will be much more at home, among a more extensive listing of Swiss media sites in general. If the link is removed again and you still want to insist on adding it, look through Wikipedia:Dispute resolution to see what avenues are open to you. dab (ᛏ) 10:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

This is deterioriating into a sectarian debate with someone I don't even know, nor whose credentials are known to me. I will not get sucked into it. I am offering people interested in Switzerland more than what appears on the "Switzerland" entry. I have no need to defend my website - it speaks for itself. Scientific studies prove that more and more people receive their knowledge and information via an aural channel. I gather from what you and others have said here that you are of the "text" persuasion. It's time to update your "files". There is no need or reason to bring my website to "media". That is missing the point entirely. Marshall McLuan said: "The medium is the message". I studied under his influence in Montreal, but I disagree. The real point is: The MESSAGE is the "message". Goodbye. Bob Zanotti [email protected]

excellent. You have just convinced me, your site is speaking for itself indeed, and has no need to be listed on Wikipedia with its crummy pre-postmodern "text"-centricity. dab (ᛏ) 13:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

But this motivation doesn't convence me :-(. You need facts, not excusess. Anyway, wikipedia is text, so also if scientific studies explain that audio is better, it is not the purpose of the wikipedia (nor to be the best and only source of informazion). (BTW in the true scientific world is it know that usually scientific studies means non-scientific paper, which normally worth null). Now I think that the link has a wrong text, and that maybe it has some worth to wikipedia (compared with majority of link). Cate 13:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

um, that doesn't quite parse for me, Cate. You seem to be going off on a tangent here, anyway. For the record, I do think that Switzerland in Sound is perfectly deserving of an article, and will be listed somewhere within Category:Switzerland, but as long as Mr. Zanotti doesn't volunteer to write the article himself, he will have to wait until somebody else can be bothered. dab (ᛏ) 14:06, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

What does CHE stand for?

What does the country code CHE stand for? Is it Confoederatio Helvetica? Thanks for any help! Perhaps something about this should be added to the article? 86.133.50.100 12:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

You're talking about ISO 3166-1 alpha-3, I presume. "CH" is the abbreviation of Confoederatio Helvetica, but why they chose the "E" for the third letter, I don't know. "CH" is explained in the lead of the article. Lupo 13:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Martin Plüss

He there! This might be a weird request but I didn't know where too ask. I'm a member of Wikipedia:Wikiproject Ice Hockey and was wondering if any of you have some information about Martin Plüss, a swiss ice hockey player. I'm currently working on a number of player articles but there isn't much info out there about Plüss in english or swedish. If someone has some info about him and his impact in the Swiss nationalliga A and the Swiss national team. I don't know what the quality of other swiss player articles are but if you have time maybe put up some info on the other more famous swiss players like DiPietro, Von Arx and so on. Cheers! --Krm500 23:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

English or Swedish? Don't know, except sv:Martin Plüss. In German, there's de:Martin Plüss. Lupo 09:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Independence

Switzerland and History of Switzerland seem to have a number of inconsistencies. According to these articles, Switzerland won de facto independence from the Habsburg Holy Roman Empire in 1315, 1385, and 1499, with no mention of becoming dependent between these dates. In addition, the article on Habsburg indicates that the Habsburgs weren't in control of the Holy Roman Empire on the first two of these three years (during which the House of Luxembourg had control of the empire, such as it was). Even if these seeming contradictions are somehow technically true, they should be clarified so as not to confuse readers. Calbaer 19:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Answer at Talk:History of Switzerland. Lupo 07:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Swiss Neutrality

It is biased to just note that Switzerland neutrality was compromised by their banks actions towards Nazi Germany. Switzerland also helped out the other side as well by being a base for spying activities against the Axis powers. So their "neutrality" was compromised on both sides.

Not sure you understand the concept of neutrality. Neutrality is basically 'treating all rivals or disputants equally'. If Swiss banks 'helped out' the Nazis, there were probably some that did the same for other interests. If they spied in Switzerland, other powers probably did, as well. Neutrality is not exclusion. ¦ Reisio 12:17, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The spying bit is very one sided. I mean, wasn't switzerland a hotbed of spying on both sides? To say that the spying on one side helped win the war is stretching things quite far...

See: Laws of War: Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land (Hague V); October 18, 1907

Art. 9. Every measure of restriction or prohibition taken by a neutral Power in regard to the matters referred to in Articles 7 and 8 must be impartially applied by it to both belligerents. A neutral Power must see to the same obligation being observed by companies or private individuals owning telegraph or telephone cables or wireless telegraphy apparatus. Sidonius 13:52, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Article Neutrality

This passage:

"Hardly surprising, considering the source of much of their (obviously "legitimate") money"

doesn't fit with the neutral tone of the rest of the piece - and it's pretty poor grammar too. Presumably the "legitimate" is intended to imply much of Switzerland's income is not legitimate. Obviously the issue of money laundering, secret bank accounts, Nazi gold and the relation to the EU and rest of the world etc could, in fact should, be discussed in relation to Switzerland - but this should be done in a full and more balenced way - rather than as one throw away comment.

Female Swiss called suissesse?

As a german-swiss I'm not 100% sure but I think a female swiss is called suisse too. Suissesse would mean someting like swissness.

Hello, i'm from geneva and suissesse is correct in french.

the term is in acutal use. but is it good French (does the Academie recognize it?) it seems like a popular coinage to mark a feminine that would otherwise be unmarked. dab (ᛏ) 10:23, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

It might also be used to distinguish a female Swiss person from the country Switzerland. In the sentence 'La Suisse s'est endormie', you cannot tell whether a Swiss woman or the entire country has fallen asleep. I posted a related question at the language reference desk, in case anyone is interested.---Sluzzelin 01:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Quoting User:Lesgles's helpful answer from the reference desk:

"Here's what the Trésor de la langue française says:

REM. Suissesse, subst. fém. Femme suisse. Les filles n'y portent plus [dans l'Ain] le corset lacé par devant, le tablier de soie et le cotillon court qui les faisaient ressembler à des Suissesses (A. FRANCE, Vie littér., 1891, p. 156). Le féminin de Suisse est Suissesse, lorsque le mot est nom propre: un Suisse, une Suissesse (...) ce féminin tend à être remplacé par une Suisse (DUPRÉ 1972).

So "une Suissesse" is the older former but "une Suisse" has become more common in recent years."

---Sluzzelin 02:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

"Establishment"

Switzerland didn't "declare independence" in 1291. There can be no talk of "Switzerland" prior to AD 1500. At best, from 1291-1331, there can be talk of an eternal alliance of the three forest cantons, which isn't the same as "Switzerland", and of an expanding confederacy 1331-1501. The cantons didn't consider themselves "independent" from the Holy Roman Empire either, they just aspired to reichsunmittelbarkeit, i.e. freedom from feudal lords, being still a part of the Holy Roman Empire. dab (ᛏ) 10:23, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree, but the 1291 was the start of an evolution. So the box should mention 1291 as "first alliance". Because there are other estblishment, people will understand that was not a definitive or true establishment and they will read the text for more information. But we need a date and the other dates are more as "It is a fact that Switzerland exists", and not an "creation" date. Cate 12:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

this is semi-mythical. 1291 is a pretty arbitrary date, that didn't have any special meaning before 1900. See also Swiss National Day, Federal Charter. I don't see how 1291 is any more of an "establishment" or the "start of an evolution", than, say, the permament settlement of Alemanni in 406. These pre-modern "establishments" in infoboxes on contemporary states are a problem more generally, see also my note on Talk:India [2]. dab (ᛏ) 12:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Well we are talking about the Confoederatio Helvetica rather that "Switzerland" and the Helvetti were some of the first occupants of the swiss reigon. My point being, as early as 1291 there was a somewhat contigious confederated state and that 1291 is probably the best date to use.

Geographic Location (8-way)

I think {{Geographic Location (8-way)}} is an ugly gimmick. Do we decide whether to keep it here, or on the template talkpage? Indeed, the article is just plastered with other useless templates like {{La Francophonie}}, {{Germanic Europe}}, {{Latin Europe}}, it is really beyond me how people can enjoy heaping up these things. dab (ᛏ) 14:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

removed. --Bob 16:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Schwingen, a Swiss variant of wrestling ???

What’s with this sentence in the "Switzerland Portal[3]"?
I mean Wrestling is a variant of Schwingen.

what's wrong with it? the sentence is straight from the lead of Schwingen. dab (ᛏ) 09:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Schwingen is an variety of werestling. For furher details visit www.esv.ch (Swiss SChwinger federation)

Moratorium Plus

"On May 18, 2003, Moratorium Plus asked about an extension of an existing law forbidding the building of new nuclear power plants." - What is Moratorium Plus? A magazine? A party? It's quite unclear. Can someone change this for clarity's sake? Iain 14:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

A moratorium is a timely limited law that forbids doing something. The Moratorium Plus was a constitutional initiative (Volksinitiative) that wanted to fordbid the construction of new nuclear power plants for 10 years. This time should have been used to find a better solution to energy problems. It was denied however by people's vote (58% No) in 2003. Nevertheless, no new nuclear power plants are planned. You can find all information about the Moratorium Plus initiative here: [4] (in German, English not available) -- Hakwea 2006-12-11 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.132.239.8 (talk) 13:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

Placement of section edit links

This may be a function of my browser, but on *my* screen the edit links for both section 1 and section 2 show up right next to the picture of Zug - in the middle of a paragraph, rather than by the section heading. My first clue that something was wrong was when I initially had my browser window at less than full-screen, those 2 edit links were actually superimposed on the text of the paragraph! Somebody will know where a little jot is out of place, causing this to happen, but that somebody isn't me! <g> Thanks! -- Newbie Mpwrmnt 08:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Proposed WikiProject

In my ongoing efforts to try to include every country on the planet included in the scope of a WikiProject, I have proposed a new project on Switzerland at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Switzerland. Any interested parties are more than welcome to add their names there, so we can see if there is enough interest to start such a project. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)