Talk:Appenzell (village)

Untitled

IMHO "Appenzell" is generally the region formed by both cantons rather the town, thus I'd move this back. -- User:Docu

Town or Village?

There is a distinct lack of consistency as to whether Appenzell is a town or a village. There are six towns and five villages in the article. Either the "village"s need to be changed to "town"s or vice versa (including the article title). Unfortunately, I have not been able to come up with any definitive reference that answers the question positively either way. The best that I have done is that it is a town but likes to consider itself a village which is not very helpful.

ZH8000, I note that you were the last person to change a single 'town' to a 'village'. As one of our resident Swiss nationals, do you have access to an authoritative reference that answers this conundrum either way, and if so, can you make the appropriate changes? In order to head off future edits restoring towns, it would be a good idea to actually cite the source. That way, if anyone wishes to argue, they have to produce a better source. DocFergus (talk) 17:11, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Whether a settlement is either a village or town is defined, first of all, by the definition of the Federal Statistical Office FSO. By the way, neither in German, nor in French, or even in Italian, there originally is no distinction between town or city as it is done in (American) English, since there are not two different terms in neither of these languages, nor is "city" an official term in Switzerland. However, since the globalization gained the upper hand and somewhat informally, a town larger than 100K inhabitants is sometimes called a city as well (in Germany, however, a town larger than 100K is officially called a "Großstadt"), while "city" (in Swiss (Standard) German) is a loan word from English.

Until 2014 a settlement with 10K or more inhabitants were considered – from a statistical point of view – as a town (de: Stadt/Städte, fr: ville(s), it: città). Since 2014, there is a new, more refined definition called (in German:) "Statistische Städte 2012", or (in French:) "Villes statistiques 2012", respectively, which also takes into consideration the settlement's character (importance, institutions, daily commuter streams etc). But the final decision is always subject to the municipal authorities.

Therefore, for example,

• Adliswil with about 18,700 inhabitants (2016) is a town by the definition of FSO (old or new) and Adliswil calls itself a town.
• Arth (11,700) still calls itself a village, even though according FSO (old or new definition) it is a town and statistically considered as such.
• Aigle (9,900) is considered as a town by FSO (new definition) and it refers itself as such. But also because of historic reasons.
• Appenzell (5,800, capital of AI) is recognized as a town by FSO (new definition), but it still explicitely refers itself as a village.

Some municipalities circumvent this definition/character problem by avoiding to call themselves neither village nor town, but, for example, refer to themselves as a municipality (de: Gemeinde; fr: commune; it: comune) only, for example:

• Arosa (3,200) or Altdorf, Uri (9,200; capital of Uri) are towns according FSO (new), but both avoid to call themselves a town or a village. They always use the term "Gemeinde".
• Allschwil (20,800), nowadays quite big as a former, small village, and recognized as town by FSO, avoids to call itself a town or a village. The municipal authorities always use the term "Gemeinde".

And to make it even a bit more complicated, many municipalities, which are not considered as a town by FSO, nevertheless use to call themselves a town, most of the time because they refer to – substantial or not – historical reasons, namely medieval town or market rights. Such as:

• Aubonne (3,200), or Ascona (5,500), or, the smallest among them, Werdenberg with 60 inhabitants only!

The same issue is subject to (still to be updated) List of towns in Switzerland. All sources are to be found in this article (perhaps we should move this discussion to its talk page?!). -- ZH8000 (talk) 22:19, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

@ZH8000: You seem to have widened the scope of this discussion somewhat. Your point that Appenzell considers itself to be a village even though it is officially a town fits with what I had discovered. For the sake of accuracy, I think the article should change all instances of 'village' to 'town'. However, the fact that it considers itself to be a village is entirely notable and of encyclopaedic value and should be documented in the article. The sources you provided are OK, but as this is the :en Wikipedia, sources should, where possible, be in English (although German sources can be machine translated, any such translation invariably looses a lot of intended meaning which can make them difficult to verify) . Are you aware of anything that would fit this latter bill? DocFergus (talk) 12:55, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@DocFergus: The FSO states very indisputably that FSO’s definition does not have the slightest political implication: "Die BFS-Definition der Städte hat keine rechtliche Verbindlichkeit." (en: The FSO definition of towns does not have any legally-binding nature).

You must know that the very federal and grass-rooted nature of Swiss politics is probably very counter-intuitive for foreigners. The highest position in Switzerland is the populace! The principle of subsidiarity (give the power to the farthest possible und reasonable entity) puts the traditionally hierarchical tree (from a single head of state down to the people) upside-down. These two major principles of Swiss politics, Federalism und Subsidiarity, puts the power to the „lowest“ possible, but still reasonable entity. In every law, act, and ordinances, on each level, federal, cantonal, or municipal, these principles are adhered.

Therefore, the right to call itself a town, is subject to the municipality’s authorities – adhering to cantonal and federal constitutions and laws (as far as I know there are no laws regarding the definition of a town). Since Appenzell is not a municipality, it is subject to the three concerning districts Appenzell, Schwende, and Rüte. All of them call it a village. That’s also the self-perception of the village’s inhabitants - or „everybody“ in Switzerland.

And due to the very Swiss political understanding we should respect this attitude.

FSO’s definition is only for statistical purposes; therefore the article calls it a „statistic town“ only.

So, I can not support your proposal. — ZH8000 (talk) 13:47, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Regarding the sources: These are the original official documents and websites. All federal documents are at least available also in French, sometimes in Italian also. Seldom in English, since English is not legally/constitutionally binding. Appenzell only speaks German. These are the most "first-hand" sources you can get; anything else will always refer to them. But if I find English "second-hand" sources I will add them. -- ZH8000 (talk) 13:47, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@ZH8000: Thank you for your explanation. I have to admit, I don't understand Swiss politics either. But then most of us don't understand politics outside of our own country. There is still that lack of consistency in the article. In view of your explanation, perhaps all the 'towns' need to be changed to 'village' (including the article title). There is no harm in a brief explanation of 'statistical town' since the term has been introduced. Incidentally, the article should not be relying on the official documents (per WP:PRIMARY), but on reliable secondary sources. DocFergus (talk) 15:55, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

@ZH8000: Unfortunately, even the majority of people does not even understand the politics of their own country.

I do not object to move the article; Appenzell (town) was introduced in order to distinguish it from the district and canton (and the area). I think, this is the only thing to be changed in order to be coherent. -- ZH8000 (talk) 11:03, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done. ZH8000, if I have cocked something up, please feel free to correct. DocFergus (talk) 13:10, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

I am fine with your changes. But shouldn't the category moved as well (and all its references)? -- ZH8000 (talk) 15:28, 2 September 2018 (UTC)