This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've had to change the caption of the photo to "Quai des États-Unis" since "Promenade des Anglais" was incorrect. The "Promenade des Anglais" is however a continuation which is seen in the distance. Apgeraint 19:16, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Can someone include information in why the French Riviera is called Cote D'Azur? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.69.243 ( talk) 17:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
On another subject I think that this article is too much centred about the vision of the region from a turistic point of view only. This is not only a region of "resorts", and is also the home of one to two million people, and hosts the 5th french biggest city, Nice. It is far to be a region of stars and rich people only. The average level of life is not really higher than in most regions of France, and is much less high than Paris, Lyon's regions for exemple. the permanant population is far to be living just for turisme, but the region is also home of flower production, universities, High-tech activities. Some districts of Nice or Cannes such as Ariane or la Bocca are low-income places with high levels of poverty, violence and immigration problems. Maybe it would be better to have an article that not just spread the cliché of "millionaires's region", which is really untrue, despite the fact that a lot of millionaires live in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.59.166 ( talk) 17:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
I think this sub- category/title/topic should be added. I have one entry in mind - the Cote d'Azur is mentioned in a song by The Divine Comedy, called A Lady of a Certain Age. Dorfl 00:31, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't it be mentioned somewhere that Jean-Marie Le Pen always polls very well here? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 147.143.241.138 ( talk) 18:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC).
I dispute that the name Monte Carlo was coined by Francois Blanc. I have read in several books on Monaco and the French Riviera that the former Speluges was renamed by Prince Charles III's mother, Princess Caroline, who wanted a name that was somewhat exotic-sounding. The princess also named the Société des Bains de Mer et Cercle des Étrangers, which still operates the casino and several luxury hotels in Monaco. Dick Kimball ( talk) 15:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and Monte Carlo wasn't a "brand-new city," it was merely renamed from the admittedly unglamorous Speluges. Dick Kimball ( talk) 15:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
The panorama at the beginning of this page is not only poorly placed, but I feel as if it offers little to the meat of the topic. It is a small marina with many boats surrounded by only a few buildings. It does not show anything very vast nor does it really expose what the French Riviera is like. This could easily be found in an article for a Caribbean Island and only a few would know the difference.
I suggest its removal from the article on basis that it does not add anything significant to the article. If nothing else it should be placed somewhere that it doesn't get in the way; it is certainly in the way now.
Wadester16 ( talk) 05:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Good suggestion - I've replaced it with a picture of Cannes, which is more typical, and I'm trying to find some other pictures that capture the essence of the Riviera. SiefkinDR ( talk) 19:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Since none of this is referenced, and a long list like this is hardly very encyclopedic, I'm removing from the page and leaving it here for reference, so that perhaps a few paragraphs could be made out of it and re-added. -- Schcambo aon scéal? 13:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Good idea. I think this list is pretty useless. SiefkinDR ( talk) 19:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Really? Then why do Travel TV hosts exaggeratedly pronounce the place in French? We do not resort to Google result as references, but it could show the real world usage,
I also found the geographical name cote d'azur at Merriam-Webster. I think French Riviera is one of attempts to unify unfamiliar foreign names to less unfamiliar loan words. This page of course belongs to English encyclopedia, but outside English-speaking world, it is called Côte d'Azur. Miami Beach is not titled American Riviera, so I think the title should reflect real world usage.-- Caspian blue ( talk) 13:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
-- 82.226.191.237 ( talk) 13:49, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Nil Blau,
Your recent redefinition of the limits of the Cote d'Azur is at odds with the definition shown in Wikipedia (French). Can you tell us how you reconcile that, please?
Your claim that "French Riviera" is 'quite unknown locally' is a statement of the obvious, because the local language is not English, whereas this Wikipedia article is an English article. If you meant that the juxtaposition of the words Riviera and Française are unknown locally, then this is at odds with the content of the official website http://www.riviera-francaise.fr. So, either way, your comment does not appear to stack up. Can you tell us how you reconcile this, please? -- JHB ( talk) 00:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
I think that this article should be renamed Cote d'Azur, with an explanation of the term 'French Riviera.' As others have pointed out, most of this article is about the wider area broadly defined, not the very narrow area of the French Riviera defined here. SiefkinDR ( talk) 11:02, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
As of this morning we have a small nucleus of contributors who believe, in effect, that this article carries the wrong title (SiefkinDR - Nil Blau - JHB). A subsidiary issue is whether the French Riviera article:
a) should be abandoned and the FR element of the content be absorbed within 'Cote d'Azur',
b) should simply be moved over to the existing Cote d'Azur article (with FR absorbed therein)and the redirection reversed,
c) should be retained separately but with the content cut down to the necessary geographical limits (then expanded in depth (particularly historically) and carry a hyperlink to the Cote d'Azur article (which would have only fleeting references to FR) at the most appropriate point. That point may not be in a common links section right at the end, which would not really be high-profile enough.
JHB preferences: c) first, b) second, a) last.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER CONTRIBUTORS / EDITORS WITH POSITIVE VIEWS ON THIS ISSUE?
IF SO, SPEAK NOW. -- JHB ( talk) 10:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I think c is probably the best option. The history of the French Riviera as a tourist destination should probably stay with the the FR article, while everything else (geography, early history, climate, artists, food, economy, etc.) should be in the Cote d'Azur article. SiefkinDR ( talk) 12:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I agree with solution c). I also suggest that we create a desambiguation set:
-- 82.226.191.237 ( talk) 13:51, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
JHB wrote: "Do you have a couple of aces up your sleeve?"
Dear JHB, once again, let me underline that the technique of
lexicography (the scientific recording of genuine language use), as it is implemented by the famous Robert dictionary ——which is a French, reputed equivalent of the English Oxford dictionaries—- is much more serious and safer than any Wikipedia o Wiktionary version. Now, here are a couple of other "aces".
I have consulted and studied more evidence on both Côte d'Azur and French Riviera, and observed several instances of Wiki involvement in these entities. The French Riviera is vague to say the least. The Côte d'Azur, I feel, started off at Hyères but those people west of there were offended and were keen to get in on the act and not be left out. If they have convinced Robert and Larousse they have done well, but that doesn't alter the creator's conception of 1887.
However, all that is as nothing when it comes to what is commonly understood by the English term French Riviera. It means Côte d'Azur, whether you like it or not, and whether it's right or wrong. That's what it means, and that's what Wiki are endorsing in almost everything they are doing or planning.
That's it, folks. You've got to live with it. Don't waste your time with nitty gritty details, evidence or protests - you'll get nowhere. People don't want to know. And neither, I am sure, do they care.
For this reason the lead section of this article will not, in fact, do itself any service or favours by hammering on about technical and historical fine points. They are not of sufficient interest and they will be a put-off for most visitors. Similarly, there is no mileage in changing the title to Côte d'Azur, for the simple reasons that it is not English and it means the same thing anyway (they think). Waste of time.
Obviously this is as much a U-turn for me as it would be for anybody else, but you only have to look at how the deck of cards is stacked to realise you are going nowhere. It would be different if Wikipedia were seen only in the hallowed halls of ancient universities, where the highest academic standards were revered. But that is not the situation.
I have rewritten the lead section to reflect what I believe to be the facts of life. -- JHB ( talk) 21:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
This stands outlike a sore thumb. Without equivalent sections on (say) the Riviera in literature, film, or TV it is pretty pointless - and probably counts as Trivia, anyway.
I have been watching this edit war which shows no signs of stopping. In reviewing the external links, I have made the decision to remove several based on the external link guidelines. Please refer to those guidelines.
Bottom line, this is clearly contentious and edit warring is not going to work. Discussion of external links needs to take place here. Spamming has never been acceptable. TastyPoutine talk (if you dare) 17:20, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
The links are off-topic and promotional, as I mentioned above. We do not provide links to official business investing sites for anything because they are promotional in nature. We may exempt certain official tourist sites under certain circumstances, but I see no reason nor discussed rationale to do so here.
Consensus is not a vote. I see brief mention of the tourism link, misrepresenting it as something other than a tourism site. I see no mention of the investing site at all. From what I can tell of the discussion, they were left as a compromise with editors who wanted even worse links included as well. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I removed the section completely. I see no discussion of the additional links, and don't think the official tourism site has enough relevant information to offset it's promotional nature. -- Ronz ( talk) 03:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
The dates quoted for habitation in "From prehistory to the Bronze Age" are in clear conflict with the dating given in the article Human. I suggest that the entire section be removed unless references can be found that fit with current knowledge as given on the Human page. Sejanus.sejanus ( talk) 19:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on French Riviera. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:01, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
The article has a section describing differing conventions for the western boundary. And there are sources. Great.
But I (perhaps a typical reader) am left wondering why the Riviera doesn't extend farther west. How does the Riviera differ from the rest of the French Mediterranean coast? For example, Marseilles is another sunny city that is very close to the Riviera but not in it. Why? Is it because the historical County of Nice didn't extend that far? Is it because the winds differ greatly between Toulon and Marseilles? The article could explain briefly. Mgnbar ( talk) 13:23, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
To add to this article: a map that actually shows where this place is in relation to the country of France. 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 19:43, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've had to change the caption of the photo to "Quai des États-Unis" since "Promenade des Anglais" was incorrect. The "Promenade des Anglais" is however a continuation which is seen in the distance. Apgeraint 19:16, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Can someone include information in why the French Riviera is called Cote D'Azur? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.69.243 ( talk) 17:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
On another subject I think that this article is too much centred about the vision of the region from a turistic point of view only. This is not only a region of "resorts", and is also the home of one to two million people, and hosts the 5th french biggest city, Nice. It is far to be a region of stars and rich people only. The average level of life is not really higher than in most regions of France, and is much less high than Paris, Lyon's regions for exemple. the permanant population is far to be living just for turisme, but the region is also home of flower production, universities, High-tech activities. Some districts of Nice or Cannes such as Ariane or la Bocca are low-income places with high levels of poverty, violence and immigration problems. Maybe it would be better to have an article that not just spread the cliché of "millionaires's region", which is really untrue, despite the fact that a lot of millionaires live in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.224.59.166 ( talk) 17:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
I think this sub- category/title/topic should be added. I have one entry in mind - the Cote d'Azur is mentioned in a song by The Divine Comedy, called A Lady of a Certain Age. Dorfl 00:31, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't it be mentioned somewhere that Jean-Marie Le Pen always polls very well here? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 147.143.241.138 ( talk) 18:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC).
I dispute that the name Monte Carlo was coined by Francois Blanc. I have read in several books on Monaco and the French Riviera that the former Speluges was renamed by Prince Charles III's mother, Princess Caroline, who wanted a name that was somewhat exotic-sounding. The princess also named the Société des Bains de Mer et Cercle des Étrangers, which still operates the casino and several luxury hotels in Monaco. Dick Kimball ( talk) 15:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and Monte Carlo wasn't a "brand-new city," it was merely renamed from the admittedly unglamorous Speluges. Dick Kimball ( talk) 15:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
The panorama at the beginning of this page is not only poorly placed, but I feel as if it offers little to the meat of the topic. It is a small marina with many boats surrounded by only a few buildings. It does not show anything very vast nor does it really expose what the French Riviera is like. This could easily be found in an article for a Caribbean Island and only a few would know the difference.
I suggest its removal from the article on basis that it does not add anything significant to the article. If nothing else it should be placed somewhere that it doesn't get in the way; it is certainly in the way now.
Wadester16 ( talk) 05:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Good suggestion - I've replaced it with a picture of Cannes, which is more typical, and I'm trying to find some other pictures that capture the essence of the Riviera. SiefkinDR ( talk) 19:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Since none of this is referenced, and a long list like this is hardly very encyclopedic, I'm removing from the page and leaving it here for reference, so that perhaps a few paragraphs could be made out of it and re-added. -- Schcambo aon scéal? 13:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Good idea. I think this list is pretty useless. SiefkinDR ( talk) 19:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Really? Then why do Travel TV hosts exaggeratedly pronounce the place in French? We do not resort to Google result as references, but it could show the real world usage,
I also found the geographical name cote d'azur at Merriam-Webster. I think French Riviera is one of attempts to unify unfamiliar foreign names to less unfamiliar loan words. This page of course belongs to English encyclopedia, but outside English-speaking world, it is called Côte d'Azur. Miami Beach is not titled American Riviera, so I think the title should reflect real world usage.-- Caspian blue ( talk) 13:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
-- 82.226.191.237 ( talk) 13:49, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Nil Blau,
Your recent redefinition of the limits of the Cote d'Azur is at odds with the definition shown in Wikipedia (French). Can you tell us how you reconcile that, please?
Your claim that "French Riviera" is 'quite unknown locally' is a statement of the obvious, because the local language is not English, whereas this Wikipedia article is an English article. If you meant that the juxtaposition of the words Riviera and Française are unknown locally, then this is at odds with the content of the official website http://www.riviera-francaise.fr. So, either way, your comment does not appear to stack up. Can you tell us how you reconcile this, please? -- JHB ( talk) 00:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
I think that this article should be renamed Cote d'Azur, with an explanation of the term 'French Riviera.' As others have pointed out, most of this article is about the wider area broadly defined, not the very narrow area of the French Riviera defined here. SiefkinDR ( talk) 11:02, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
As of this morning we have a small nucleus of contributors who believe, in effect, that this article carries the wrong title (SiefkinDR - Nil Blau - JHB). A subsidiary issue is whether the French Riviera article:
a) should be abandoned and the FR element of the content be absorbed within 'Cote d'Azur',
b) should simply be moved over to the existing Cote d'Azur article (with FR absorbed therein)and the redirection reversed,
c) should be retained separately but with the content cut down to the necessary geographical limits (then expanded in depth (particularly historically) and carry a hyperlink to the Cote d'Azur article (which would have only fleeting references to FR) at the most appropriate point. That point may not be in a common links section right at the end, which would not really be high-profile enough.
JHB preferences: c) first, b) second, a) last.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER CONTRIBUTORS / EDITORS WITH POSITIVE VIEWS ON THIS ISSUE?
IF SO, SPEAK NOW. -- JHB ( talk) 10:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I think c is probably the best option. The history of the French Riviera as a tourist destination should probably stay with the the FR article, while everything else (geography, early history, climate, artists, food, economy, etc.) should be in the Cote d'Azur article. SiefkinDR ( talk) 12:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I agree with solution c). I also suggest that we create a desambiguation set:
-- 82.226.191.237 ( talk) 13:51, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
JHB wrote: "Do you have a couple of aces up your sleeve?"
Dear JHB, once again, let me underline that the technique of
lexicography (the scientific recording of genuine language use), as it is implemented by the famous Robert dictionary ——which is a French, reputed equivalent of the English Oxford dictionaries—- is much more serious and safer than any Wikipedia o Wiktionary version. Now, here are a couple of other "aces".
I have consulted and studied more evidence on both Côte d'Azur and French Riviera, and observed several instances of Wiki involvement in these entities. The French Riviera is vague to say the least. The Côte d'Azur, I feel, started off at Hyères but those people west of there were offended and were keen to get in on the act and not be left out. If they have convinced Robert and Larousse they have done well, but that doesn't alter the creator's conception of 1887.
However, all that is as nothing when it comes to what is commonly understood by the English term French Riviera. It means Côte d'Azur, whether you like it or not, and whether it's right or wrong. That's what it means, and that's what Wiki are endorsing in almost everything they are doing or planning.
That's it, folks. You've got to live with it. Don't waste your time with nitty gritty details, evidence or protests - you'll get nowhere. People don't want to know. And neither, I am sure, do they care.
For this reason the lead section of this article will not, in fact, do itself any service or favours by hammering on about technical and historical fine points. They are not of sufficient interest and they will be a put-off for most visitors. Similarly, there is no mileage in changing the title to Côte d'Azur, for the simple reasons that it is not English and it means the same thing anyway (they think). Waste of time.
Obviously this is as much a U-turn for me as it would be for anybody else, but you only have to look at how the deck of cards is stacked to realise you are going nowhere. It would be different if Wikipedia were seen only in the hallowed halls of ancient universities, where the highest academic standards were revered. But that is not the situation.
I have rewritten the lead section to reflect what I believe to be the facts of life. -- JHB ( talk) 21:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
This stands outlike a sore thumb. Without equivalent sections on (say) the Riviera in literature, film, or TV it is pretty pointless - and probably counts as Trivia, anyway.
I have been watching this edit war which shows no signs of stopping. In reviewing the external links, I have made the decision to remove several based on the external link guidelines. Please refer to those guidelines.
Bottom line, this is clearly contentious and edit warring is not going to work. Discussion of external links needs to take place here. Spamming has never been acceptable. TastyPoutine talk (if you dare) 17:20, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
The links are off-topic and promotional, as I mentioned above. We do not provide links to official business investing sites for anything because they are promotional in nature. We may exempt certain official tourist sites under certain circumstances, but I see no reason nor discussed rationale to do so here.
Consensus is not a vote. I see brief mention of the tourism link, misrepresenting it as something other than a tourism site. I see no mention of the investing site at all. From what I can tell of the discussion, they were left as a compromise with editors who wanted even worse links included as well. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I removed the section completely. I see no discussion of the additional links, and don't think the official tourism site has enough relevant information to offset it's promotional nature. -- Ronz ( talk) 03:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
The dates quoted for habitation in "From prehistory to the Bronze Age" are in clear conflict with the dating given in the article Human. I suggest that the entire section be removed unless references can be found that fit with current knowledge as given on the Human page. Sejanus.sejanus ( talk) 19:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on French Riviera. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:01, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
The article has a section describing differing conventions for the western boundary. And there are sources. Great.
But I (perhaps a typical reader) am left wondering why the Riviera doesn't extend farther west. How does the Riviera differ from the rest of the French Mediterranean coast? For example, Marseilles is another sunny city that is very close to the Riviera but not in it. Why? Is it because the historical County of Nice didn't extend that far? Is it because the winds differ greatly between Toulon and Marseilles? The article could explain briefly. Mgnbar ( talk) 13:23, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
To add to this article: a map that actually shows where this place is in relation to the country of France. 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 19:43, 29 September 2020 (UTC)