Talk:Giovanni Luppis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

== Austrian, croatian or Italian? == Useless question, good for stupid nationalists. Lupis was from Fiume/Rijeka, and he served with loyality in the Austrian Navy (so it was an austrian soldier). His origins were a mix of italian and croatian. He studied in Italian language (in Fiume Gymnasium and in Venice's Academy). Fiume/Rijeka was multiethnic city. The urban people was moslty italian, but the countryside was croatian. It belongs to Hungary, but it was a base or the Austrian Navy. The people spoke Italian, Croatian, German and Hungarian. Those languages were also used in the schools and in the press. Lupis was from FIUME, not from Italy of Croatia or Austria.--Giovanni Giove 10:20, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
He was born in Nakovane, Pelješac not in Fiume.--WerWil 09:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

The inserted references say he was born in Fiume. The history of the family, says that the family moved to Fiume in XVII century and that, there, they belonged two palaces.

Just have a look! Greetings. --Giovanni Giove 09:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 family tree and Italian information in general 2 Personal names are not translatable into other languages 3 Name of Rijeka 4 Ethnicity of Luppis

[edit] family tree and Italian information in general

Hello Joy, I'm sorry to see that you deleted again some correttions of mine. Lupis (wolfes) belong to an aristocratic family of the Italian nobility. A brench moved to the south of Dalmatia and slavized the name in Vukic. Then they moved to Fiume/Rijeka and they italianized again the name in Lupis or Luppis (read the links I inserted). You should know that in that the time the city was a "Corpus separatum" (separated body) of the Hungarian Kindgom, and that the urban population was mostly italian. So, it's not correct if you put the italian name in minor evidence. The turn the name in Lupis was a decision of the family itself, not of some italian nationalist of the 20th century! Furthermore it's not correct if you claim that Lupis is a "croatian engineer". It was from Fiume/Rijeka that belong to italian and croatian culture, in the same time and it's not correct to apply the PRESENT national conditions to the past. You want to impose your point of wiew, and this is against the rules of wikipedia. I will restore my corrections, pleas don't delete them againg or I shall ask for the intrvention of a moderator.

Others: - in the History of the family, wrotten by mr. Marco Lupis, I've seen that he was born in Fiume/Rijeka and he dead in Milan. Just have a look (you can understand this). - It's not possible this story about "italian garibaldines", for the simple reason that they never had a navy. Furthemore when Lupis started to work to the weapons there were not "garibaldini" at all. So....

Anyway I've contacted the family and I hope they will tell thir correct point of view. BTW: the photo came direct from the family: they decided to write Giovanni Ivan Lupis, so don't change it. --Giovanni Giove 09:08, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't find any mention of Giovanni in the link Ancestor Line from the duke Marco Lupis to Frederick II, only in the Historia_Stirpe_Luporum.pdf file,

This is true, but the site is for sure about Lupis'family, and it's in English: so it's in topic with the paper.

--Giovanni Giove 13:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

and I don't see how that one says that these people reverted to Italian nationality - IIRC, it says that there was one Luca Lupis who maried a Francesca Craglievich (which is Italian for Kraljević, that word sounds as if it has a clear Slavic etymology to me), and then it talks about this Giovanni born in 1813. I don't see why he would have to be Italianized back again. --Joy [shallot] 10:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Francesca Graglievich sounds clearly as an Italian name with a of slavic origin. : Many italians in Fiume had such kinds of names, wrotten in an italianized way and with the a final "h".

I personaly know many examples (fron, Istria, Fiume and Dalmatia)... Amisich, Percovich, Aglich, Cosulich... and so on.

So it's makes no sense and it's incorrecto to translate that asserttion about a "local Croatian noblewoman from the family Kraljević (Craglievich)". There is the evidence that the womano was not croatian.

--Giovanni Giove 13:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

In any event, for the assessment of to whom does he "belong" or at least with whom did he align, I found it quite indicative that a Google search for "Giovanni Lupis" returns very few hits (37), and one hit for "Giovanni Biagio Lupis" (the one from istrianet.org). Since it's mainly the Croatians who are preserving the legacy of this person (by way of remembering him, not merely his invention), and the Italians don't seem to be particularly interested, it seems logical to think that he indebted the former more than he did the latter. Granted, this could mean nothing, too, but we'd need more evidence to make that conclusion. --Joy [shallot] 10:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

As you said this means nothing. If the interest about Fiume/Rijeka in Croatia is high, in Italy is low. That's the reason.

--Giovanni Giove 13:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

As you can see from page history, I've plucked many of those factoids from a Croatian site, an essay from the student site of the naval faculty of the University of Rijeka. The bit about Garibaldines - I don't think this is irrelevant since in 1866 they did indeed wage war with the Habsburg Monarchy for whom Lupis worked (and took back Venetia which was fairly close to where he worked). --Joy [shallot] 10:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

The Garibaldini were an irregular force that ad a role in the Italian indipendece. It shouuld be correct to say "against Italians" (after 1861). Anyway there is not the historic evidence that Lupis was aimed by the purpose to do something "against italians". It seems that that student site wish to present Lupis as a "croatian patriot". Support this idea with documents, otherwise don't mention it.

--Giovanni Giove 13:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

About the place of birth on Pelješac, that's information from http://www.nakovana.hr/, where they say that there's an old house in that nearly-abandoned village that was his. Admittedly, they don't explicate that he was actually born there - it could have been his ancestors' house. There live people who are also with the surname Lupis (yet they don't have the Vuk* appended). --Joy [shallot] 10:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Fiume/Rijeka is metioned in the history of the family, based on the personal documents of the archive of Mr. Marco Lupis.

I propose to write Fiume/Rijeka.

--Giovanni Giove 13:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

About the place of death not in Milan - that's from this biography at a random Croatian site. I took it for granted because it seemed to have other detailed information about him as well. It also says that he was born in Fiume/Rijeka in 1814. It's difficult to wage the accuracy of either of these, since for example the link you pasted has exact dates, which could mean that they copied it from an authoritative and precise source, and yet they don't have much other particular information about him. --Joy [shallot] 10:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Same answer.

I propose Milan.

--Giovanni Giove 13:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Also the bit about French and the Sardinians - that I also picked up from the essay at pefri.hr. The Kingdom of Sardinia article says that it served as a "buffer state" against France, so that could be the basis of that comment. During the Revolutions of 1848, the Sardinians did wage war against the Austrians. Furthermore, in 1859 France sided with Sardinia in the Austro-Sardinian War. Lupis went into retirement somewhere around this time - it sucks that we don't have an exact date for this. --Joy [shallot] 11:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

You are talking about PIEDMONT, and Sardina belonged to Piedmont.

During the revolutions of 1848, Piedmont moved war against Austria together other italians states. FRANCE was not involved in this war, that was fighted inland and not on the sea.

Furhtermore, Venice was the last city to surrender, after months of siege. The war was finished everywhere when Venice surrended, and you saied that Lupis blockheaded Venice.

--Giovanni Giove 13:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

During his retirement, the Italian unification was well at hand, and his and Whitehead's work was used by the Austrians to counter that. It seems a bit odd that a person who you think should be remembered as an Italian would use his talent for working against the Italian interests. Yet it's also odd that he moved to Italy and died there. --Joy [shallot] 11:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Lupis did what an austrian officer was supposed to do, and this give no information about his nationality. Several sailormen from Venice fighted against Italy in the battle of Lissa, this does not mean they were not Italians.

--Giovanni Giove 13:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal names are not translatable into other languages

Therefore, the claim that Giovanni Biagio Luppis von Rammer is (in Croatia known as Ivan Blaž Lupis-Vukić) is utter nonsense.--GiorgioOrsini 15:59, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name of Rijeka

Quote from [[1]] page; "Please, keep in mind that, per WP:NC, for the purposes of naming this article the names used for this artist by Latin, Italian, Croatian or Chinese-speaking individuals and authors (of the past, present and future) are irrelevant. Instead, we should consider only the names commonly used in English-language" Rijeka is known in English language as Rijeka, not Fiume:) And that is also its historical name (on Croatian language).

Also, writing with Pelješac which says now in Croatia, is somewhat offensive to Croats, because Pelješac was populated by Croats a long time ago, and that reference indicates temporarity.

Do you have some census which could prove that Rijeka had ethnic Italian majority? If not I suggest that you put " had an large number of ethnic italianians in it" phrase.

|Ceha 19:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Just look for the Austrian census, and look for an Austro Hungarian map. You will find 1) Fiume was an italian city 2) the official language was Italian (and not Croat), all the names of the east Adratic coast were reported in Italian. Sabbioncello was the official name of the peninsula till 1918.--Giovanni Giove 13:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ethnicity of Luppis

Luppis could be Italian or maybe Croat. In Luppis' time the concept of nation was well developed. As a matter of fact Fiume had a large italian majority. The upper classes were nearly totally Italian. His name was clearly Italian (Giovanni Biaggio, and NOT Ivan Blaz, that is just a recent possible translation), in that time this was a sign of the Ethnicity. Luppis moved to Italy in his last years. When his family moved to Fiume in the XVII century, it had Italianized back the name in Luppis. I think is enough to say he did not considered himself as a Croat, whilst there are many facts that say us he was Italian.--Giovanni Giove 13:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Giovanni there is no reason to repeat the fact that he is Italian when it is stated so right there at the top. There are no controversies in this article as it is and I don't see a reason to change anything. Unless of course there are sound arguments for such a change. Tar-Elenion 15:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

RIght, it discussed in the intro. But intro is just a short abstract of the full article, so it is normal that some concept of the intro are repeated in the following article. That is normal for all the scientific articles. Greetings--Giovanni Giove 15:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The intro is a constituent part of the article. There is absolutly no need to repeat the same fact several times in the article as it is already esatblished and such practice reduces the quality of the article significantly. Besides, the article is very clear and I must say I can't see the reason why now all of a sudden you insist on this. Please be reasonable. Tar-Elenion 15:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)