Talk:March on Rome

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the March on Rome article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: European / Italian

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. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	Italian military history task force (c. 500–present)

Italy Start‑class High‑importance

	Italy portal 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
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on October 28, 2004 and October 28, 2005.

On 30 July 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to March on Rome (1922). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Untitled

please note,

this article has been plagiarized from Encyclopædia Britannica

This page appears to be an exact copy of the (current) Encyclopedia Britannica article "March on Rome." - - "Rome, March on." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2006. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 15 May 2006 <http://0-www.search.eb.com.lrc.cod.edu:80/eb/article-9083848>.

This shouldn't be the case anymore. Tazmaniacs 01:18, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyediting

I have editede the first paragraph under "Context." Some of my edits removed pieces of information which I thought to be either unnecessary or confusing. That is subject, of course, to the thoughts of others, so please check my work. LawrenceTrevallion 03:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Information

The information in this article contained lots of small errors, and I only checked a few sentences. I've been cross-referencing it with "Italian Fascism: Its Origins and Development, Third Edition" (DeGrand, University of Nebraska Press, 2000). It might be beneficial to clarify the article's text and check its facts more thoroughly.

Bias?

quote from current revision:

"The March on Rome was not the conquest of power which Fascism later celebrated but rather a transfer of power within the framework of the constitution, a transfer made possible by the surrender of public authorities in the face of fascist intimidation and the complicity of the bourgeoisie, who thought it would be possible to manipulate Mussolini. The latter had declared himself a member of the Manchester School in favour of free market and laissez faire economics."

First, unless the inclusion of the term 'bourgeoisie' is strictly relevant to the concept of fascism of the article, it makes the latter part of the article read like old-school marxist propaganda.

Second, unless a cite can be supplied that Mussolini was a Manchesterist and a laissez-faireist, I'm likewise going to have to assume that this is the work of a disgruntled marxist, since conflation of free marketry with fascism is a very old rhetorical sleight of hand in that camp.

I've marked that article as NPOV until this can be resolved. - Peter Bjørn Perlsø (talk) 01:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plenty of non-Marxist historians and political scientists use the terms "bourgeois" and "bourgeoisie." Marx did not invent the term, but merely adapted them to his own analysis. The terms were certainly contemporaneous during the French Revolution as a way to describe the wealthier elements of the middle class who lacked noble status. Perhaps your opinion about the terms is influenced by personal experience, but these are far from "old-school marxist propaganda," as you described. Historymike (talk) 12:43, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been unable to find a source that can conclusively link Mussolini with the Manchester School, so I removed that statement. However, it is well documented that Mussolini placated the business and financial interests with pro-capitalist rhetoric, and the citation I provided should ease your concerns. Again, just because Mussolini said he was pro-business and laissez faire in his policies does not mean that he actually was a classical liberal.Historymike (talk) 22:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Says Mussolini was supported by "the business class" should that not be the "upper-middle classes" the "the business class" sounds like airline passengers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.0.153.229 (talk) 15:10, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on March on Rome. 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/20051107193129/http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0031633.html to http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0031633.html

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) 21:18, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a Fascist coup d'état

The March on Rome was a publicity stunt. Mussolini's assumption of power was entirely legal - it was not a Fascist coup d'état.122.59.213.148 (talk) 06:43, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel the text of the article does not reflect consensus then please alter it, providing verifiable sources according to WP guidelines. regards Guffydrawers (talk) 18:22, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 30 July 2024

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 consensus. There isn't any consensus. The nominator (supporter) argued that the 1919 event is not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Although there weren't evidences or citations to relevant WP policies and WP:DPT like page views, e.t.c, it was opposed by a conflicting viewpoint, that March on Rome surpasses the examples of other uses by the nominator, hence, the WP:PT. (closed by non-admin page mover) Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 12:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March on Rome → March on Rome (1922) – I cannot see how Mussolini's march on Rome can be the primary topic here. Caesar and Sulla's marches inspired Mussolini. Politically all of the marches have been of great importance Traumnovelle (talk) 09:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. "March on Rome" unqualified almost always refers to this event. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:39, 1 August 2024 (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.