Talk:France

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Jump to: navigation, search
This is the talk page for discussing changes to the France page
Please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). Place comments that start a new topic at the bottom of the page and give them ==A Descriptive Header==. If you're new to Wikipedia, please see Welcome to Wikipedia and frequently asked questions.
Talk page guidelines
Please respect Wikiquette, assume good faith and be nice.

Contents

[edit]

Opening Paragraph Overlapping

Could anyone fix the overlapping table in the first paragraph? It renders it unreadable.

[edit]

English-Wikipedia is a big joke!!

Just look at how the french have been insulted on the France-page (presumably by North Americans, except some decent Canadians maybe). Why all this hatred towards the french. It´s just pathetic to see. Those of you who actually visits France will see that there´s none of this ugly hatred aimed at the US in France. So whats the ¤%¤%&/&% deal with you guys? Most of the North Americans tend to see the fact that because most French doesn´t speak English (most notably the elder generation) as a sign og hatred for the US. If there is any country that (in my very most modest personal opinion) that really live up to the words like "chauvinistic", "arrogant" and so on it´s absolutely the US. While most in the US aren´t bilingual (except for the spanish-speaking immigrants) there´s the opposite in Europe (well, except for France ;-). The French just happens to have a very strong and colourful culture and they are proud of having it. Just as Swedes, North Americans, Germans etc should be proud of theirs respectively. And just one more thing, how many times don´t you hear things like "I don´t like it - it´s un-american etc... in the US????

I agree... France is awesome...

The French are a bunch of wimps! I don't like them because we saved their butts in WWII and they don't help us in Iraq and such. Who cares what language they speak?

Ehh...? You are a great example why it's so damn hard to respect americans. ffs grow up! The "it's not american - I don't like it" attitude is just so lame. Give it up. The whole world don't agree with you all the time. Accept it! Vandalising a wiki page won't make the world like you and it just makes you seem even more childish. English wikipedia is not a joke nor is america nor americans a joke, only people like this guy above is.
[edit]

France: Prime minister and the president

What is the difference in the powers between the prime minister and the president in France? Sorry, just curious. --qbertsoul

The President and the Prime Minister both embody the Executive branch of the State, but the President carries representational duties (as "the voice of France") and has the supreme authority over foreign relations. He is also the supreme chief of the armies.
The Prime Minister is the highest administrator of everyday affairs.
Usually, the President and the Prime Minister have similar political views (the Prime Minister is selected by the President), so their respective realms are not much of an issue. However, the President is elected by direct vote of the People, while the Prime Minister and his government depend on the majority at the Assembly (because the Assmebly can censor the government); since the Assembly and the President are not elected at the same time, it is possible that a majority opposing the views of the President be elected, forcing the choice of a Prime Minister opposing the President. Obvioulsy, in this configuration, the domains of competences are severley guarded. This is the "cohabitation", which hapened thrice in the Vth Republic. Rama 9 July 2005 08:13 (UTC)
See Government of France, President of France, Prime Minister of France. David.Monniaux 18:18, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

Opening sentence

From LaurelBush 16:41, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC): I suggest the article's opening sentence should read:

"The French Republic or France (French: République française or France) is a sovereign power centred on Paris in western Europe, and a country whose metropolitan territory is located in western Europe, and which is further made up of a collection of overseas islands and territories located in other continents."

The expression 'sovereign power' places the power on a map in relation to other soverign powers, such as the UK (centred on London or Westminster), Ireland (Dublin) and the US (Washington DC). Perhaps 'UN-recognised sovereign power' is more precise.

The common usage is to say "country". --David.Monniaux 17:04, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm curious about the use of "metropolitan territory". I'm not familiar with this term, and the current link to Metropolitan accesses a disambiguation page; as part of my work is on Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation I'd like to work toward eliminating such links. Could someone explain the meaning of "metropolitan territory" to the end of either altering the wikilink or replacing it with a more common expression? Thanks. Courtland 16:17, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
    I resolved this by replacing with a piped wikilink to Metropolitan France. Courtland 17:37, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

Area of France

There is still a problem with the correct area of France. The article currently says its ranked 47th in the list of countries by area. However, it is ranked 42th at the moment (the list also refers to Metropolitan France and the French Republic separately) and the areas given in both places are different. If this article is right then France would even be higher up in the ranking. Any authorative source on this issue (maybe some french governmental website etc.)? The list says it refers to the CIA Factbook, but I did not check whether this is true. --Markus Krötzsch 15:36, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

INSEE says [1] that the total surface of France is around 549,000 km² (543965 in Metropolitan France, the rest in oversea possessions). --David.Monniaux 10:09, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Check the table at the beginning of the article about France. I put there the exact area of France, with footnote to what it refers to exactly. --Hardouin 00:30, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
[edit]

"strict France"

To whoever added : '*If only strict France is considered this number lows to some 40 million', the least you could do is explain to the rest of us what on earth you mean by 'strict France.' The first time I read it I thought you meant the Metropole, but then I saw the entry for Spain and realize that you're removing some groups (Basques? Catalans? Occitans?). --MichaelTinkler


[edit]

German and Dutch languages

I wonder why someone has added, among the languages spoken in France, German and Dutch. These are not spoken in France, except by tourists. --GP

There really is a very small minority of Dutch speakers in France, located in the northeast corner, at the Belgian border. I don't known whether these people speak it as a first language, however. It is also claimed that the possibility to meet a Dutchman in the summer is higher in France than in Amsterdam, so there are lot of people speaking Dutch ;-)
Maybe this could be understood in the way that there is a lot of foreigners tourists in amsterdam? and there is a lot of dutch tourists in france during summer, some even owns a house in the countryside, but they still are tourists. --Izwalito
Well, though the Flemish (rather than Dutch) traditions may still be present around Lille, I have never met any Flemish-speaking person coming from French Flanders. Maybe among people over 70 years ?
While Flemish is really just a dialect of Dutch (although many speakers of both languages will deny that), I really don't know who speak it, it is just mentioned in most reputable language reports of France. --Jeronimo
I could image some people in the Alsace/Elzas speaking German, but I don't really know. --Jeronimo
You may be right, but actually they probably wouldn't agree ; the dialect(s) spoken in Alsace is (are) germanic, but Alsatians are reluctant to call it German. Of course, this is subject to debate.
I have replaced "Dutch" and "German" by "Flemish" and "Alsatien" respectively. These are the actual names of these dialects, and they both link to articles, which in turn link to "Dutch" and "German". --User:Olivier

I've replaced Alsatien by Alsacien. First because it's the way we write it. Then, because by judging the number of hits on google (35 instead of 28 200 for Alsacien), most being personal pages or wikipedia page, it's obviously not the english way to write it. Mispelling probably. --user:anthere

I'm the one who originally added Dutch and German to the list of languages spoken in France. As has been pointed out, both are indeed used in France, though mostly in their local dialect form (Flemish and Alsatian), with the standard language serving as the language used in education and, generally, writing. Even though only French is an offical language in France, and Flemish has a positively tiny number of speakers, they still deserve a mention. I've further put "German" back in, partly because Alsatian is strictly speaking just a (Alemannic) dialect of German, partly because "Alsatian" doesn't entirely cover the German spoken in Lorraine (which AFAIK is Franconian in origin). --Scipius
People in Alsace will probably object to "Alsacien" being considered only as a "dialect of German". I originally come from Alsace and linguists in the area consider Alsacien to only share a common origin with modern German. I.e, they are both Alemannic languages. I'm not sure I understand the distinction between the "German spoken in Lorraine" and Alsacien; there are numerous variants (different words, not only different prononciation) of Alsacien. People in the south of Alsace can have major difficulties understanding the northern version, and vice-versa. AFAIK, the "German spoken in Lorraine" is a variant of "Alsacien" the locals object having called "Alsacien" for mainly territorial reasons.
Almost every french region has its own dialect or patois, telling an alsacien person that alsacien is german is very offensive and can lead you into trouble
A rose by any other name is still a rose.--68.80.223.233 19:05, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
My 2 cents: I have been to Alsace many times and never had a problem speaking German with the locals, even though I also speak French. Never got into trouble for that! Alsatian is one of the many dialects of German and closely related to the German dialects on the other side of the Rhine. People from both sides of the Rhine can converse with each other in their respective German dialect and have no trouble understanding each other. Trust me, I know this, since my grandmother is Alsatian and I (even though I speak another South German dialect - Schwäbisch -) also do understand Alsatian. There is of course a difference between the Alemannic German dialects spoken in Alsace, the German Southwest, Switzerland and the western Austrian state of Vorarlberg and Standard German (Hochdeutsch), which is the national standard in Germany. The difference between the German dialects spoken in Alsace and Lorraine has to with the fact, that the dialect of Lorraine belongs to another German Dialect group - Franconian - and has more in common with the dialects spoken in Rhineland-Palatinate, the Saarland etc. Also, there are differences between the various forms of Alsatian, which is typical for German dialects or for that matter, dialects in general. Last, but not least, the author of the remark regarding the dialects or "patois" or French regions is confusing 2 different things. There are of course different dialects of French, especially in the Southern part of France, that differ tremendously from the national standard. However, that got nothing to do with non French languages spoken within France, such as Alsatian, Breton, Corsican, Basque etc.
Having said that - I would like to add that I love France, the culture, the cuisine, the language and that some of my best friends are French. So don t even think about getting into an argument with me about German-French conflicts.... :-) Those days are over and we are all GOOD Europeans now!
Greetings from Pacific Grove, CA --Luke


The learning of foreign languages in France tends to be heavily influenced by geographical and historical factors. Understandably, people close to Italy more often learn Italian; and people close to German naturally tend to learn German as a foreign languages. Thus, people able to speak German in Alsace may not actually be that much related to dialects.
There are of course different dialects of French, especially in the Southern part of France, that differ tremendously from the national standard.
I do not see what you mean. I'm a native French speaker; I've been a number of times to various places in the South, I've got family there. Except for the use of a few local words (which would apply in most French regions), the only noticeable difference is a difference of accent — but this certainly does not constitute a dialect (though I can understand that it can be hard for non-native speakers). --David.Monniaux 07:59, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I wouldn't call them dialects, although they are mostly Romance languages, they are significantly different from French. Many of these were still widely in use in the early 20th century (although the French government discouraged their use until recently). From my personal experiences, I have found that a significant portion of older French people, especially in the southern regions, can speak or at least understand some of these different languages. Some examples include Langues d'Oc, and Languedocien. It is interesting to note that "Languedocien is used primarily by rural people over age 50", so it will likely die out within a few generations. --user:Nezbie
These are indeed generally referred to as different languages, not dialects (but I'm not an expert on the topic). A dialect is a variant of the same language; thus American English is a dialect of English, and Quebec French is a dialect of French. In the south, there exists Occitan, Provençal etc. but these are romance languages related to French but significantly different. (I know some elderly people who speak provençal.)
What I meant above is that though there are obviously some regional languages (fast dying out, as you point out) there aren't real regional dialects (i.e. established variants of the same language, mutually intelligible, with minor differences in grammar and vocabulary). David.Monniaux 15:42, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
Alsace-Lorraine was once part of Germany and has been an integral region in both German and French history. The very first German bible was in fact printed in Strasbourg. Alsacien (or Elsaessisch in German) is classified by Ethnologue as Alemannic, which is not truly one language, but a number of 'German Dialects', which also include Swiss German, which is not mutually intelligible with Alsacien. When Alsace-Lorraine was a part of Germany, the language was probably just called 'Deutsch' by the locals. Given the current political status of the area, it would seem most fitting to classify it as a language of its own. 7/27/05 --user: Kusgan
[edit]

Number of regions

The article regions of France says there are 22 regions, whereas this one says 23: what is the actual number? Why is there this difference? --User:Oliver

23 is the real number. There are 22 on the main territory (régions métropolitaine), and 1 more including the overseas departments --ant
Has the 23rd region the exact same status as the other ones? "with conseil regional"? Where is the capital/seat of the conseil regional of this region? --User:Olivier
22 régions métropolitaine + 4 overseas = 26 regions
However, I'm not sure Corsica is a region, I think it's a 'colectivite territorialle', ie a special status entity. The overseas regions are a bit different as there is only 1 departement in the region; so region and departement have the same 'conseil'. (There is a similar stuff for Paris, which is a Departement and a city.) --Ann O'nyme
  • Insee settles it once and for all, they list 26 regions.
Corsica is NOT an overseas collectivity. It is a metropolitan region made with two departements (haute corse et corse du sud). --anonymous
The overseas regions are a bit different as there is only 1 departement in the region; so region and departement have the same 'conseil'. False. See for instance Réunion, where the regional council has a Communist president and the general (deparmental) council has a right-wing president. Both collectivities are distinct even though they operate on the same area. David.Monniaux 18:21, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

Important cities

I'd like to know what defines an "important" city. Honestly, I have never heard of Doue-la-Fontaine, and other cities listed here seems not to be major cities to me at all. If the definition of an important city is its size and maybe something very particular about its activity, I'd like the size and maybe the specific activity to be clearly defined. It seems to me some cities added here are not much more than big villages, and it does not look "serious" at all. It sounds as if some are the big villages where the editor is living. I totally agree these cities could have a room in wikipedia, but not listed as major cities. We could link them directly from their department rather, or from a tourism page. I'll do it if nobody objects.

  • Doué la fontaine
  • Barcelonnette
  • Montrichard
  • Noyon
  • Rochefort
  • Bayonne (maybe)
  • Firmini
  • Foix
  • Saint Girons (and not Saint Giron)
  • Saint Raphaël
  • Tavaux

--user:anthere

Something has to be done about that mess... May be creating 3 sections, e.g. Major cities/Historic cities/Touristic cities. --Ann O'nyme
There does seem to be a problem regarding what a "grande ville" really is for the French. They will speak of "les grandes villes de Dijon, Besancon, etc.", which are rather small, while the French media often describe our (much) larger American urban areas as small: "la petite ville de Oklahoma City, de Wichita", etc. (Yet these two U.S. cities, if they were French, would be in the Top Five of France!) Would a kind Frenchman care to comment?
I've never heard any of the sentences that you quote – certainly nobody in his right mind in France calls Besançon a "grande ville", except if commenting on local matters (ex: to a guy living in a small village in Burgundy, Dijon is a big city). In any case, I've never seen "la petite ville de Oklahoma City" anywhere. I will as go as to say that your examples are made-up.
By the way, Wichita would certainly not be in the top Five of France; its population is about 580000 inhabitants, which would rank it at #8 in France.
Now for more serious matters. The importance of a city/town/village is partly defined relatively to its surroundings and, also importantly, the point of view of the intended audience. To a French audience, Oklahoma City is an unimportant city: contrary to city like Los Angeles or New York, it has no "brand name" recognition, it's just a (however highly populated) boring area in some foreign country. I suppose that similarly, few Americans have ever heard of the département of the Nord (an area of France with about 2 million inhabitants, more than a bunch of minor US states). The importance compared to surroundings is clearly illustrated by maps: in sparsely populated areas, even minor towns in absolute terms are displayed on the maps. A city like Dijon is important because it's the only city of that size and the only one with a full university in its area. Some cities are important in local terms because they are prefectures (seats of government) etc. (just like some minor US cities are somewhat important as state capitals).
None of the above cities are "important". Barcelonnette, for instance, is a small sub-

préfecture... David.Monniaux 18:37, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing this up. No, I'm making nothing up: I have watched TV5 and read French publications, and yes, TV5 did call both Oklahoma City and Wichita "une petite ville" (pertaining to major news events there). True, French media discuss big elections in the "grandes villes" of Dijon and Tours, but those are local issues. That Wichita would be number 8 in France is splitting hairs on your part; the French media make more geographical mistakes than any others I've seen except our own U.S. media--a sad record. Ultimately, you stress that it's all a matter of "local" or "relative," and I accept your analysis.

I agree with your analysis that the French media makes numerous geographical errors when they deal with foreign countries, including the US. I'm surprised that journalists would call Oklahoma City and Wichita "small", but maybe they confused size and importance (note: TV5 rebroadcasts news reports from a variety of non-French francophone TV channels) — they may have thought that since they had never heard of Wichita (few people in France have heard this name), then it must be a small city.
Dijon is a "grande ville" relative to what is around it — even though its population is less than that of a large Parisian arrondissement. David.Monniaux 17:10, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

Freedom Land

I believe it is imperative that this be moved to Freedom Land. --Susan Mason

Is that an unnecessary jab at the French? --ugen64 23:02, Oct 8, 2003 (UTC)

It seems to be more of a jab at French bashing than at France.

[edit]

Overseas territories

Do the overseas collectives and the other small islands claimed by France belong to the EU? --AxelBoldt 10:39, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

The oversea départements do, the oversea territories (New Caledonia, French Polynesia, TAAF) don't, and I don't know about the other ones. --David.Monniaux 20:03, 26 May 2004 (UTC)


[edit]

British English

Is it okay for me to make the article use British English? Since France is in Europe, I feel that British English is more relevant for the article. --WhisperToMe 06:00, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Apology, but I am not entirely convinced. Is the language right now entirely american, or partly only ? Could you point out at some examples ? Thanks. Anthère
It's considered bad form to change from English to American spelling or vice versa, unless the article is specifically about those languages or places. --RickK 06:34, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I see that Color is in U.S. English form (after Tricolore), but that may be the only example. --WhisperToMe 05:40, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
As Rick said, there is a habit to keep a text in the spelling it was written, WisperToMe.
And it is not because England is nearer that we are only influenced by british english and not american english. Granted, children at school tend to learn more british english because of the exchanges between the countries (though actually exchanges are very frequent with Ireland as well) but adults practice much more american one. It is not bothering us that color is in american english WisperToMe.
I am not sure why you think british english is more relevant.
(and color fits very well with tricolore). --Anthère 06:38, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Re British English: As an American, I'm not bothered by British English in an article about a European country. British usage makes total sense. However, you should use American English in articles about American people, places, and things. We like our U.S. spellings, vocabulary, and syntax just as much as the British like theirs, so "Brit-speak" in an article about us would be jarring and inappropriate. --Mason
This is Wikipedia's policy: UK-specific articles should be in British English, US-specific articles in American English. But, here, we're discussing France. --David.Monniaux 08:02, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Right, David, but many Europeans (especially the French--I lived in France for 3 years) follow British usage much more than American. Thus, most readers won't be miffed if an article on France is written in British English, the common language of Europe. --Mason
British English, the common language of Europe. You must be kidding. David.Monniaux 08:01, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Not at all. British English has become the lingua franca of Europe. The usage, vocabulary, and accent taught in your schools (often as a required subject from age 10) are overwhelmingly British. --M.
Sure. (I note that English is not a required subject from age 10 in France; foreign languages are, and English is either taken as a 1st or 2nd foreign language.) British spelling is naturally favored in schools, and is the official spelling used in European Union documents.
However, engineers, scientists, businesspeople etc. often, and I would even say "generally", work with American spelling, even though this is not what's taught in secondary schools. This reflects the large importance of the US for such professions compared to that of the UK. I myself generally use American spellings unless writing specifically for a British audience. --David.Monniaux 05:54, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

When I lived in France in the '70s, the English I heard was totally British. Britons were almost always preferred as lecteurs or lectrices d'anglais in your universities. (They hired few Americans in those days.) I guess times must change—and that's good. --M.

"British" English is also used in Australia, South Africa and India.

I believe it's more accurate to say that indian english is used in India. --Izwalito
Canadians also use British English (with a few exceptions), The United States of America is about the only place that does not use British english.
As long as they are part of France, and as long as France is part of European union, the overseas departments are part of the european union. As a result, when you are in Guyane, in the middle of amazonean rainforest, you are in the European union.
That's exact in the case of Guyane, but inexact in the case of the French Pacific possessions, which are not considered to be within the EU. --David.Monniaux 08:53, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

Currency of France

It's not correct to state in the table that the currency of France is both the Euro and French euro coins respectively. One have to distinguish between a currency and legal tender. The currency of France is just the Euro. French euro coins, along with all other "national" euro coins are legal tender (in France and in the rest of euroland). Thus, if the table wants to give information about coins and banknotes having the status of legal tender, it is uncomplete (since in this case all other "national" coins have to be stated as well). If the table refers to the currency, it is just correct to mention Euro. --Gugganij 15:32, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)


[edit]

Grammar

It's OK in terms of content. But the grammar in the article needs a lot of work. Not anything to change the sense or even the tone of the article - Bog forbid - it just needs tiny little adjustments so it reads as if whoever wrote it speaks English competently as their first language. Little details like "it's vs. its" and unnecessary plurals drive me crazy. I care about France very much, (my daughter goes to a French school!) and I want the article to read more easily and represent the country better that way. Facts I leave to the natives, but I can help with the English. When I have some extra time, I'll go through and fix these minor things a little bit here and there as I can. My best to all. -- Hwarwick 16.40 PST, 30 June 04


[edit]

Frogs

does anyone know anything about the Frog association with France? mnemonic 23:49, 2004 Jul 3 (UTC)

Supposedly, the French eat frogs/frogs legs, at this, being "gross", appals many in Anglophone countries. In reality, frog legs are a rare delicacy, which many French probably have never eaten in their life. They actually seem more common in Chinese than in French restaurants. --David.Monniaux 08:11, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
you can also check this webpage from more supposed origins of this nickname


[edit]

About Anglophone tastes

I don't think we should care of what the Anglophones things which is good or not to eat... I never thought that many Anglophones are interesting under that point of view... :-) With all respect! PS: the Argot word to call an english is "Crustacée" because they are rigids, walking on the wrong sense and eating shit and corpses ! :-) so... ;-)

Someones Bitter

"Eating shit and corpses !"- What? The British Royal Navy is no longer a haven for cannibalism. We have that problem relatively under control.

[edit]

Currencies

Wouldn't it be better to add a footnote which specifies where the CFA- and the CFP-Francs are used? Otherwise one might get the impression, that those are currencies which are also used in the mainland. --Gugganij 14:47, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

CFA Franc is used nowhere in France. CFA Franc is the currency of a number of countries in Western and Central Africa (and is pegged to the Euro). CFP Franc is the currency of the French Pacific territories. --David.Monniaux 18:16, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Thats's the problem I wanted to point at. --Gugganij 14:50, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)
[edit]

Intro

The sentence It holds nuclear weapons does not belong in the introduction. Was it francophobic vandalism? --Liberlogos 14:12, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

No, it was not intended as French bashing. I added the string because it is featured (or was...) in the French version of Wikipedia, because I though it might be revelant (since nuclear capability somehow seems to be a common trait of permanent Security Council members), and that it certainly is an important feature of the nation (think of the energy that de Gaulle or Chirac have put into this...). And also because I felt slightly depressed with the state of the world at the time, I must admit ! :p
It's not a problem about featuring this information, but about featuring it in the early introduction, as if it were one of the most essential characteristics of France. It's as if you had added "He once took illegal drugs" in the first sentence on a page describing some politician – while mentioning it in the text, for instance when discussing drug policies, can make sense, mentioning it at the beginning is just plain accusatory.
Nuclear weapons are not an essential trait of France. They are one of the main traits of its defense policies, which themselves are parts of France's policies, which are one aspect of France. --David.Monniaux 16:05, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
That's interesting that you seem to consider possessing nuclear weapons a negative trait ("Was it francophobic vandalism?" and "It's as if you had added "He once took illegal drugs" "); it is often seen as a token of high technology, and proof of power and "untouchability" of the country. Not that I disagree with the fact that nuclear weapon do have a negative aspect as well (understatement-fest, yeah ! :) ).
Besides, I'm agreed with David, and anyway, the "Security Council" thing is mathematically equivalent, without the militaristic connotations, so, so much the better !
Well, I think that it's simply a matter of proportion and focus. In the introductory paragraph of most articles, the main characteristics of a person, country etc... are summarized. Focusing on characteristics such as weaponry has the undertones of an accusation of bellicism. It may be justified, of course, if the said country frequently threatens the usage of these weapons; but France does not parade its nukes nor does it threaten other countries with them. --David.Monniaux 10:45, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Personally, I think that the introduction should list key features of the subject treated, so that people that don't have time or patience to read the article can have an idea of the main points. The fact that France is one of the few nuclear powers on Earth is certainly something that stands out, and I think it should be in the introduction. I suggest rephrasing like this: "...a permanent member of the UN Security Council and one of only seven alleged nuclear powers on the planet." I also think that the fact that France's economy is the fifth-largest in the world should be noted in the introduction, such as: "The economy of France is the fifth-largest in the world in 2003." Last but not least, it seems the United Kingdom has been forgotten as a neighbor of France. Are maritime borders not as important as land borders? It should also be specified that these neighbors are for metropolitan France ONLY. The French Republic has many more neighbors, such as Brazil, Surinam, The Netherlands, etc. I let people express comments and suggestions before making any of the 4 proposed changes here. --Hardouin 16:28, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I agree. Mentioning nukes as a characteristic among others is ok; what I disagreed with was that it was the only characteristic mentioned. --David.Monniaux 17:57, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
In 2003, 85,7% of electricity produced in France comes from nuclear energy. Nuclear power as energy source is way more important in France than the nuclear weapons. source --Izwalito


[edit]

Religion

If you think there's an accuracy or POV problem in the "religion" section, please clearly state what you think is wrong and why on the talk page; merely glueing a "the following paragraph is dubious" label does not contribute much. --David.Monniaux 10:07, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)


[edit]

Francophobic vandalism||jealousy?

I found that the edits made by 213.140.6.103 where reverted by Evercat, why? --Surcouf 30/08/2004 14:08 CET

About the only thing of value in that edit was the figure of 77 million tourists. I'll add that back if you like. The rest was either POV ("wonderful museums") or gibberish, ie "exceptionalism of his architectural, historical and artistic patrimony." - what the heck does that mean?? --Evercat 22:50, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I removed a fairly long enumeration of "facts" from the intro. --David.Monniaux 21:58, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Please stop franco-phobic stupid vandalism, there is a link with official data of the year 2002 taken from WTO, if you not agreed with that try to justify why and find me other number and sources, if not: shut up, without offences... ;-)
Surcouf 20:40 CET 01/09/2004
BTW this is not a new fact as you can see here France was already ranking 1st for tourism in 1997 with 67,310,000 Tourists
Surcouf, can you please provide a reference on a web site supporting these values ? --SweetLittleFluffyThing 20:50, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Here is a source at the French Government [2] which gives a figure of 71,000,000 --the most in the world--but also makes the distinction that the U.S. has the highest income from tourism in the world (a completely different statistic); France is third in that count. Googling supports that the most visited countries are France, Spain, and the U.S. in that order. Peace everyone, --Antandrus 20:55, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Franco-phobic vandalism from Marcus2
I reported on wikipedia about WTO datas for world tourism rankings, those data was also published on "Capital" n°155 magazine in France and in TV (France2), the ranking reported France first world tourist destination with 77millions tourist a year (FOREIGNER), I'll make links on "economy section" to USA, GB, France, Spain and Italy (impossible: italy is blocked) with no problem (it's an official World Tourism Organization stat!) but a boy with nick Marcus2 reverted my edits on france denying the facts (and so the WTO official datas...) claiming that there's no evidence about that...
What I can do? He menace me to block my user... --Surcouf 21:22 CET 01/09/2004
I'd say to first assume good faith from him. Marcus obviously wants the best for the article, and providing references (if there are references) should be enough to convince him. Also, I recommand that you avoid calling his reversions vandalism, if you do not want this to backfire :-) Usually, when name calling starts, it escalate pretty badly :-) Keep it cool guy. --SweetLittleFluffyThing 20:59, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)


[edit]

intro length

The new text that has been added in the last month or so clutters the top of the page and is contrary to the WikiProject Countries template and intention. --Joy [shallot] 14:22, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I totally agree. I feel a bit responsible actually, since I am the one who started adding a few points into the introduction last month, things I deemed were missing there, but then people started adding into the introduction everything that went thru their head. The point of an introduction is, well, to introduce the subject, and to highlight key points. By cluttering it with a hodgepodge of information I think we really defeat the purpose of an introduction. I have taken out unnecessary information and put it down into the article, so that the introduction is now left with only the essential things (hopefully). --Hardouin 11:41, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
There's also way too much text now in the Demographics section, while the Demographics of France page doesn't have anything like it. It should be mass-moved. --Joy [shallot]
Done that now. --Joy [shallot] 14:37, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)


[edit]

International Schools in France

Does anyone know of international schools (K-12) in France (that is, schools that teach in English)? I already know of the two in Paris and one in Toulouse but I am pretty sure there are a few more out there...

Please note that K-12 is an American abbreviation; most Europeans won't understand it. [For those who might help: K-12 means "kindergarten to 12th grade", that is, primary and secondary education.] This is not really the place to ask for such things...
Actually you're wrong. Many international schools in Europe use the American K-12 system. And I guess you have a point (Even though you didnt really make one) that this is not the forum to make off-topic inquiries. I apologize.
Before saying that people are wrong, you should read what they write. :-) Most Europeans don't know what K-12 means, even some who might know about Anglophone schools in their vicinity.


[edit]

Error on main entry

I don't know how to properly fix this, but there's obviously an error on the main page. Someone has added some slanders french history and possibly deleted some stuff.

There are people watching over the page to check for possible vandalism. It just doesn't get fix straight away every time. --David.Monniaux 21:43, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I noticed it too before, I was about to remove the text that was included but someone beat me to it.

Not sure whether this is the right place to point that out, but what's with that picture of Spain in the history section. It is not even referenced in the text, I think that ought to be removed.

[edit]

Use of definite article

Please don't overuse the definite articles le/la when citing French phrases (a common error of many anglophones). One normally doesn't put le/la in front of an expression like France or République Française unless it is inside a sentence of its own. For instance, some official letterhead may start with République Française but will never start with La République Française. --David.Monniaux 09:27, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)


[edit]

This is cool. I can write on the page and no one will care.

How come this page says "This is cool. I can write on the page and no one will care." ??? but I can't find out where it was added. I tend to see such strange things after 'nuclear weapons' is mentioned on wikipedia.

Hi. See Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers. -- Infrogmation 03:59, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)


[edit]

Religion in France

Where is the article on this? Fascinating subject, complicated interplay.

Now moved to Culture of France. I'll put a summary here. --David.Monniaux 08:30, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
uhhh huh --anonymous


[edit]

Flag

The previous flag was the old flag and was not did not match with colours that were listed in the french flag article --nicksukh

[edit]

Infobox

I'm sick and tired the infobox being moved around. --David.Monniaux 09:00, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)


[edit]

Locked ?

What's with this lock? what are the editing disputes related to this lock? --Izwalito

The infobox was being moved up and down and up and down. --David.Monniaux 18:53, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I'd like to add Link to a French language website to the links to French language websites, but I can't do it while the article is locked.. --Zantastik 07:55, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)


[edit]

Sign of France

Whoever wrote the article, you forget to mention 'Marianne', which is the symbol of the French Republic. I got you a link with an actual picture... It's french though:

http://www.elysee.fr/instit/symb6.htm

"Marianne is the symbol of France since the consitution of 1958 made the Blue-White-Red flag official. She is a sign of Liberty"

If you scroll down the page, there's a link to Marianne. We should perhaps make it more proeminent. --David.Monniaux 07:52, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I agree. It's like having an article on the Netherlands without mentioning William of Orange. --Shinobu 16:32, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)


[edit]

Military of France

As one of the most important nations in the world (exery nation may have it's beauty and so on, but you know what i mean.), I think France's military should get an own section in the article. BTW, the main article on it is very messy. --Predator capitalism 18:55, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You are welcome to improve it. --David.Monniaux 20:05, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)


[edit]

Vandalism

What happened?? We all need to work together as a team to act more quickly a vandal starts messing with wikipedia articles. --nicksukh

We had a string of vandalism coming from various educational networks, at some point. --David.Monniaux 05:08, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Il n'y a aucune raison pour protéger cet article. Il faut simplement exclure les idiots qui détruisent la page. C'est ça. -Heimdal 15:39, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Cela suppose que nous puissions bannir toutes leurs adresses IP, ce qui n'est pas si simple, vu qu'ils interviennent visiblement depuis de nombreuses adresses à travers le monde (peut-être des machines infectées par un virus et faisant "open proxy"). David.Monniaux 16:12, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Erm...the entire page has just disappeared.

[edit]

Insulting the French

Note: by the 2nd of May, 2005 part of the conversation had become jumbled up. I used the history to figure out who wrote what when. Shinobu

Why is it that so many people like to vandalise pages about france or the french?

I think I fixed it. Whoever did this needs to learn a lesson. Anonymous S. African
Why do so many people like to vandalize pages about the U.S.? I'm disheartened if there's any anti-French sentiment whatsoever in English Wikipedia. Yet, in my experience, anti-Americanism is far more widespread in France than Francophobia will ever be in the United States. Mason.Jones 16:56, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
(continued below — Shinobu)
Really? I'm afraid it doesn't seem to sink to the kind of vulgarity and ignorance that we see here. Is your experience based on living in France? David.Monniaux 22:31, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it does sink that low, I'm afraid. My friends from Paris think so, too. Mason.Jones 02:13, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
(continued from above — Shinobu)
And now I see that a totally awkward, ideologically inspired word – états-unien – must replace américain on the French Wiki site.Mason.Jones 16:56, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
You're perhaps not aware of this, but southern americans really hate the use of american or américain or americano with a meaning restricted to the United States. Some people thought it appropriate to use a more specific word. David.Monniaux 22:31, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Spanish-speakers have used estadounidense or norteamericano for ages. Yet almost overnight the French Wiki site imposes états-unien, a term very few Francophones use—not Le Monde, not Libé and not any French person I've ever met. This is an ideologically driven change on the part of French Wikipedians, that's all. Mason.Jones 02:13, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
I wouldn't like the word "European" to be used specifically for Germans, for sure... but if it's ideologically driven, it must be evil indeed... I don't really see what using a precise word for naming the inhabitants of a country instead of a generic word, applicable for the whole continent, has to do with the vandalising of this page though. On a sidenote I still haven't seen primary anti-americanism here, although people make fun of Americans just like of anybody else (but of course I lived in the civilised world, not Paris or another big city, haha). → SeeSchloß 07:15, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
Oh and I'm not sure what you mean with the French wiki, the French USA wiki page says "Américain" everywhere and the search engines find it about 100 times more than "états-unien". And I can't find a decision asking to use either of the words rather than the other on the bistro, or the community portal page (except for one discussion last week, which doesn't have any conclusion). → SeeSchloß 07:32, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
Hmmm. So, because of minority of Francophone wikipedians (not necessarily French, and clearly not representative of society in general) declare they prefer to use étatsuniens, you read into their thought and conclude this is motivated not by a desire of precision or of accomodation for South Americans etc., but by anti-American ideology? And then you consider this an example of widespread Americanophobia in France? Interesting. David.Monniaux 14:09, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
The entire debate is (or was) in the "Discussion" section for the article "États-Unis". The winner: états-unien, a weak, marginal term but now the only entry under "Gentilé" in the info box (a friendly gesture to South Americans, according to Mr. Monniaux). Throughout the French site, américain will be displaced; the imperialists have been punished. Mason.Jones 18:07, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
Dear, dear. This is nothing to get all worked up about. In Europe the term America is often used as a kind of verbal shorthand for United States'. In some situations the more specific term might be more appropriate because it avoids confusion. Oh, and please don't quote search engine hits. The number of hits you find might not tell you the whole story. Some of the "américain"-hits are not (just) about the States. Apart from that instead of "états-unien" the phrase "des États Unis" is often used. Shinobu 18:43, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

I don't want annoy Mason.Jones, but I think that he's comparing apples and oranges. On the one hand, we have the choice of étatsuniens, a precise and descriptive term, though not widely used; on the other hand, we have people posting caricatures of political leaders as weasels, schoolyard-level insults, and other vulgarities. It does not take high casuistic skills to recognize that the latter exhibit more blind hate than the former. On the Francophone wikipedia, I've never seen this level of vulgar, uninformed, hateful anti-Americanism, while this kind of francophobia is regularly exhibited on the English-speaking wiki. 10:45, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

I fear I must second that... though I must say it is better than it used to be two years ago... user:anthere
Unfortunately, I'd have to agree with this. From my personal experiences, the French have a rather strong feeling of dislike for what they perceive as the cowboy "go it alone"/"my way on the highway" mentality, "Americanisation", and cultural hegemony. However, this pales in comparison to the sleuth of vulgar, crude francophobia often encountered here in the United States and engrained in online media. Just doing a simple online query reveals the frightening amount of online sites founded over the sole purpose of bashing anything gallic, and waging a war of disinformation. I have yet to see this sheer amount of extremism in France regarding the United States, wether it be expressed online or in real life. user:Nezbie

I don't have the impression that the France article is more often vandalised than other pages. I also see a lot of vandalism on the United States page, for that matter. Besides, it seems to me that it's always the same few individuals who disrupt the pages. Perhaps a stricter policy against vandalism would help. People should be warned, and if they do it again, their IP should be blocked. - Heimdal 13:25, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

We had a wave of vandalism from different IPs from educational networks around the globe (perhaps hacked machines). David.Monniaux 16:48, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Well, I have a little personal story that may help stop all the bashing of France and the vandalism of the France page (And Dave, one of the schools that may have been vandalizing the page might have been mine; the opinion on the French there is pretty negative).

         One time my Dad was sitting in a chatroom on AOL.  Now, we all know how
         nasty some of those pages can be, and this story is proof of that.  The
         room was entirely made up of United States citizens (and proud ones at 
         that), save for one French citizen.  Every single American in the room 
         was bashing the person, using every stereotype and insult in the book. 
         Finally he got everyone in the room to be quiet long enough for him to 
         type, "Look, we've been dealing with the Iraqis for a rather long time 
         now, and we've learned one thing about them after all these years.  Its
         that the Iraqis really aren't all that ready for Democracy.  And they
         won't be for the next 200 years.  You really have to trust us on this
         one."  Shortly after he said this, the entirety of the American citizens
         in the room was cheering the man on.

In case anybody reading this didn't know what the Frenchman was referring to, it was the current situation with the war in Iraq. I hope that this of all things helps to end the vandalization of the France page on Wikipedia. Of course, for anyone to read this, they would have to come and click the discussion link and sit through and read all of this. :wink:

--Nelson || Hit Me Up 04:51, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Military spending

I wonder whether the quoted figures include the budget of the Gendarmerie (which, for the vast majority of its missions, acts like a civilian police force and would not be counted into the military budgets of some other countries). David.Monniaux 16:49, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

In case you're referring to the figures that I posted on May 4th. I can't say whether they include the Gendarmerie. I quoted from the following article: EU's Fragmented Defense Market Thwarts Bid to Bolster Military. You can find the figures in about the 27th paragraph of the article. - Heimdal 10:03, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

Neutrality

I noticed while reading the article that many sentences were somehow trying to show France in a positive light by showing statistics about economics and nuclear power. I do not get that feeling while reading articles about United States, Japan or Germany. Maybe someone can help tidy up the article. Strangely even the article on India seems to suffer from the same problem. Is it got to do with an inner feeling of the people of nations truly great at some point in time? --coolmallu 22:45, 2005 May 4 (UTC)

Since the article was largely written by non-French people, I don't quite see what you mean. All articles about countries are supposed to contain statistics and other quick information allowing the reader to quickly get an idea of the position the country on various aspects. David.Monniaux 06:37, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
It may have been largely written by non-French people, but it is heavily edited and well-guarded by pro-French people. I was surprised to see that the article on the United States has far less bias. I am not American or French. --Csnewton 21:47, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

I'm obviously not alone in perceiving bias—some of it blatant—against the U.S. but not against France. Many articles about the United States, especially those in French Wiki, are loaded with negativity. When it comes to the world's superpower, the tone is distinctly leftist.Mason.Jones 19:07, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"left" == "negative" ? I only read the fr:États-Unis article anyway, and I didn't see any negativity in it. → SeeSchloß 18:54, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, as in "left" == "the ONLY way we see the racist, imperialist superpower in French Wikipedia". The fact that the article "États-Unis" is less virulently anti-American now may be because some of us Amerloques with good skills in French edited it to be a tad less one-sided. It was a chore, Mr. Schloss, believe me.Mason.Jones 17:58, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Administrative Divisions

Can the two columns be aligned somewhat more?

[edit]

White Flags

  • Does anybody know where I could find a picture of a white flag? It would do wonders for my user page.Frenchman113 18:53, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

About Referendum on Constitution

Someone needs to revise the part about the referendum on the European Constitution. The French people rejected it. -Amit

I see an edit war coming upon this article with the no vote at the French referendum. We better be cautious. At this point, nobody knows what the no vote means really, and what the future will be. We do not have enough perspective to say what the consequences of the no will be, therefore it is better to only briefly mention it for the moment, and wait and see. To start editing the article and saying that France is no more a leading country in the EU just because the French opposed that particular consitutional treaty of the EU is totally absurd. Hardouin 01:34, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The only edit war I see coming is from one highly pushy individual who wants his point of view heard, and no other, "Hardouin". This points to the entire problem with the Wikipedia concept. The site is, in effect, written in act of sequential censorship, especially so when certain individuals decide to show up. - Joseph (65.182.172.89)

I fail to see what you mean. Since Sunday there have been already many edits and reverting about the referendum, done by many users, and I just intervened yesterday (Wednesday) to remove some totally out of context ranting about Russia and Chechnya. Libeling people is not really a good way to advance the discussion. Hardouin 11:39, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

Lost/Regained Territory

I removed the following paragraph:

No other country in the history of the world has lost and regained its territory so many times. Some would say that this is due to France's military might, some would argue the link opposite.

Can the first sentence be backed up with any sort of facts? If we set aside for a moment the issue of what it means for a country to lose and then regain territory, there are several other locations that could legitimately lay claim to the distinction -- for example, Poland, Israel, Egypt, and parts of the former USSR; it all depends on how you count it. The definition of such is too messy and subjective to be put into an encyclopedia. Andrew Levine 23:18, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Fête de la Fédération/Bastille Day

In the Bastille article, it says that the Fête de la Fédération was a celebration of Bastille Day. If this was the case, it makes more sense to regard the July 14 holiday as a celebration of Bastille Day than a celebration of its first anniversary!

Either way one of the articles needs altering.

The 14th of July is a commemoration of the Fête de la Fédération, period. The Fête de la Fédération is a symbol of the unity of France, when representatives from all provinces declared their desire to form a united Nation. The 14th of July was made the National Holiday of France in the 1880s, after Germany had annexed Alsace-Lorraine from France in 1871, and it was purposedly chosen as the National Holiday to strenghten the unity of the country, and also to make it clear that Alsace-Lorraine were French, because the representatives of Alsace-Lorraine had freely joined the French Nation at the Fête de la Fédération. Hardouin 00:06, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This question was also asked a number of times on the article Bastille Day, eventually prompting the creation of the Fête de la Fédération article; I think that the importance of this little-known event is better underlined there, and it seems that it becomes easier to understand why the 14th of July should commemorate this event. Rama 08:25, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

French hatred

Would somebody please kindly explain to me why people such as Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, and Sean Hannity hate the French so much?(My apologies for only naming Conservatives, but those are the only people I know of that seriously hate France.) For those who date our friends the Francsters, I have something to say. First, the only time they've ever majorly disagreed with us was in the Iraq war. All they said was that they didn't think it was a good idea to invade Iraq. They never ever supported Saddam or the insurgents. Secondly, if it wasn't for France, our Revoultion for our freedoms that French-haters proudly brag about would most likely have lasted a lot longer, and we may not have won it at all. Finally, because of the revoultion, France has been our oldest ally. For crying out loud, they gave us The Statue of Liberty, and we thank them by renaming their fries?! Something's wrong. I studied French at school last year, and found their culture to be more welcoming and friendly than most Americans I know. Thank you very much for reading my thoughts, and I look forward to having my questions answered.

*Discreet cough* See anti-English militancy at French Wikipedia (in French, naturellement)
the "anti-english" group is just a linguistic initiative to limit the importation of non translated words. It doesn't have anything to see with english hatred.
because FOX, along with the rest of our 'liberal' media is owned by Rupert Murdoch, he's a british conservative, hatred of the French was a nice little export from British, Murdoch-owned, tabloids..
Actually, Murdoch is AUSTRALIAN!
[edit]

France portal

I've started making this Wikipedia:Wikiportal/France wikiportal thing. I have no idea how to draw tables and pretty things like that, so if someone can gimme a push forward, and collaborate with me on it, I'd appreciate it --Expurgator t(c) 23:33, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I was surprised to see the Portal link below the country infobox. I've added a table to help in positioning the portal link at the top right of the article, making it more easily accessible. There is likely a more elegant way of doing this, but after tinkering about a bit with the mechanics, this is the best method I could find. Courtland 16:09, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Continuity during the Nazi occupation

An anonymous editor just put forward a rather interesting point of the perenity of France during the Second World War, but what was said was incorrect:

If this is true, then one must consider the occupation of the Nazi Germans in 1939, who had occupied France for over 5 years. During this time, French leaders had fled to England and France was a protectorate of Germany, thus interrupting its statehood.

In fact, first a part, then whole France was under Nazi occupation, but the French State remained. One is left with the choice of allegiance to either Vichy France, or the Free France in exile in London.

  • Vichy, however traitorour it was, was a sovereign and independent state, much like Iraq today.
  • On the other hand, De Gaulle was indeed a lawful representant of the previous government, the only remaining one able to exercise power; this situation is comparable to that of Poland at the same time.

In either case, the country did not cease to exist. Rama 4 July 2005 13:42 (UTC)

[edit]

Administrative divisions

Should be shortened and only mention the 26 regions - a reference to the full list would suffice. Longs lists never positively contribute to a good article. Themanwithoutapast 00:01, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Disagreement over link: want to resolve

I added a link to the France page, which was deleted. As I'm a novice here and the person deleting is an experienced editor, I tried to contact him to discuss. I've gone to his user page and left a message but had no response (perhaps on vacation or perhaps doesn't consider my message worth responding to).

Rather than just re-adding the link (to probably have it re-deleted), I would like to discuss the reason behind the deletion. Is there anyway to find the EMAIL address of a Wikipedia editor to communicate directly? Is there a better way to proceed than merely posting on his user page?

Suggestions and comments welcome. Following is the text of my original posting (not yet responded to) and my EMAIL address in case anyone wants to respond direct.

[edit]

===============================

Moncrief

This morning I added a link to my site, which I believe you've deleted. I would like to discuss why the link was deleted and whether there is anything I can do to have it readded.

First, some background. My site (www.france-property-and-information.com) is 95% informational and 5% commercial. To make it more attractive to Wikipedia, I've separated the informational portion from the commercial portion, creating a 'pseudo home page' for the informational side at http://www.france-property-and-information.com/france_and_french_property.htm.

I consider the information at this link to be substantial and interesting. Furthermore, it is expanding weekly, so I see its value continuing to increase. As it deals with France (food, culture, wine, regions, etc.) I feel the FRANCE portion of Wikipedia is a suitable place for it.

If the link was removed because it was considered unsuitable, could you let me know what I would need to do to correct this problem?

Doug Stewart (dougstewart@france-property-and-information.com)

[edit]

Improvement Drive

The article Napoleonic Wars has been listed to be improved on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. To support the article, you can add your vote there.--Fenice 08:03, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Dutch flag

The French flag was not inspired by the flag of the Netherlands. This theory put forward by an anonymous user repeatedly in the last days is simply not supported by any proof and seems to be only a (chauvinistic?) guess from that anonymous user. Actually, ironically, I found out that it seems the Netherlands designed their flag in the 17th century based on the blue-white-red colors of the Bourbon of France. According to the French Wikipedia it is King Henry IV of France who suggested these colors to the newly independent Netherlands. Finally, the Netherlands did not have borders with France at the time of the Revolution as the anonymous user wrote. France had borders with the Austrian Low Countries, but not with the independent Netherlands. Hardouin 30 June 2005 11:06 (UTC)

[edit]

==

The original colours of the Dutch flag were orange, white and blue. King Henry V of France did not suggest to the Netherlands to use red, white and blue. The Dutch started using red because the orange colour was unstable in flag making.

This is not chauvinism. Here are some sources:

http://www.minbuza.nl/default.asp?CMS_ITEM=MBZ460652

http://www.heraldica.org/topics/france/frflag.htm#tricolor

http://www.languedoc-france.info/06141201_tricolore.htm

scotthatton 11 August 2005 16:19 (UTC)

[edit]

100 most accessed articles

I noticed while browsing about some Wikipedia statistics pages that this article appears on a 100 most accessed articles statistics page as #100. (accessed August 27, 2005) Courtland 16:12, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

  • The "100 most" link is now dead ... I am looking to see if I can find a replacement. Courtland 03:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

Vandalism March 2005 to August 2005

The IP address 216.229.18.122 appears to have only been used to vandalise articles about France, starting in March 2005. Is it possible to get this IP # on a block list (I'm ignorant of how that might be done and whether it would be approved). Courtland 21:54, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Blocked for 14 hours. Rama 22:00, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

overlapping images?

There was an edit that carried the comment "Fixing overlapping images. This article needs a lot of work." Overlapping images? Not in my browser (Firefox 1.0.4) and not using the MonoBook (default) skin. I'm curious if others feel this article needs a tremendous amount of work or not from a formatting perspective. Courtland 00:18, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Actually... it looked fine here with Konqueror 3.4.1 before the change ([3]), but now the sunflowers picture is overlapping the text ([4]). → SeeSchloß 17:17, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

Question

Hello! I've started translating the English article in a foreign Wikipedia & I was wondering about the meaning of this phrase from the history section: "The eastern part (which would soon unite with the central portion as the Holy Roman Empire) can be regarded the beginnings of what is now Germany, the western part that of France." Isn't something missing from this phrase? Thanks! --Vlad 21:59, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't think so, it means: "The eastern part (...) can be regarded [as] the beginnings of what is now Germany, the western part as [the beginnings] of France." David.Monniaux 05:49, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

What is lacking is a comma. "The eastern part (which would soon unite with the central portion as the Holy Roman Empire) can be regarded the beginnings of what is now Germany, the western part *,* that of France." Rama 07:05, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

Missing languages section

The info-box mentions French[1] as the language:

1 See [Languages section] for regional languages

The link doesn't work! Isto Ylisirkka 20:00, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm quite sure I originally set the link to #Demographics, but it must have changed at some point. I corrected it, but maybe we need a new Languages section ? → SeeSchloß 21:13, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
I solved the problem by restoring the languages section which an anonymous user had deleted. Hardouin 11:07, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

Making France closer to Featured Article status

This article is very far from the FA status. Many things have to be done:

  1. reduce the length to 30-35 KB
  2. remove too many info that are better fitted in daughter articles (e.g. table about the languages, story of the name, etc..)
  3. remove all the lists and replace them with prose (in particular culture section is very poorly written

In this aim I have tried to strongly edit the article. Many things I did have been reversed. I'll try to do this once again. I hope it will be more successful this time. Compare with FA like South Africa, Nepal, India, Hong Kong or People's Republic of China to see what should be a kind of aim. Vb 19:36, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Recent FA have been far from 30-35kb. Indeed, some have been 69kb or more. --Bob 22:57, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
No FA about countries! France doesn't need more place than any other country! Moreover if someone would expand for example culture as it should, you jump very fast over the 69KB record! In such a case I wouldn't be the only one to oppose a nomination. Vb 13:15, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I tend to agree (without looking at FA history) that Featured Articles on countries are not that good of an idea. I wouldn't go so far as to exclaim as User:Vb has, nor would I suggest we should conspire to make the article unsuitable by bloating the size ... that solves absolutely nothing. I would rather see Featured Articles on things that have not been well addressed elsewhere as a concept in toto, acknowledging that aspects of any country article here will expand on things not related anywhere else. Encouraging country articles as Featured Articles is an invitation to skew the content almost completely over into that domain as once France is the subject, next it will the the United States, then Germany, India, Brazil ... you get the idea. Something I should likely suggest over at the FA pages is that a "country FA" be considered separate from the general FA. This would provide a forum for the establishment (eventually) of all country articles to Featured Article status, which I think would be a good idea as a matter of quality and scope. Courtland 19:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:France"
Personal tools