This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 20 August 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Philippe Égalité. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
can anyone make sense of this sentence?
mcoverdale ( talk) 14:47, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
I suspect that the "comtesse de Buffon" referred to here would be the widow of Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon, but am not sure. If someone knows, worth a link in the article. -- Jmabel 22:41, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)
Similarly, I'd guess "count of Champcenetz" is Louis René de Champcenetz, but I'm not sure. Presumably related, anyway. If someone knows what individual is referred to, a link would be good. -- Jmabel 22:52, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)
Very British biased... 1911 Encyclopedia ? Ericd 20:13, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
A lot of unsourced edits are being uploaded rapidly to articles on French royalty. Some appear dubious, others wrong. Yet requests for reputable citations are ignored, deleted, or inadequately sourced (page numbers in books are essential to verify if the citation is accurate) -- while the wholesale editing continues. Please respond to these requests, either with reputable sources or more careful edits, before adding additional unsourced material. Also, much of the added material is redundant, excessive, or trivial. I've already recorded repeated objections to 1. unsourced allegations (e.g. that seem unprecedented, unlikely, or undocumentable) are apt to be deleted unless precisely sourced 2. redundancies (if it's in a box on the page, it's apt to be deleted from the text): 3. excess (details which belong in another person's article [e.g. parent, spouse, child], or which describe hard-to-verify details [e.g. "She felt envious": unless it's an attributed quote from a diary or correspondence -- how is it possible to know what someone who died hundreds of years ago "felt" or "thought"? Let's stick to what they verifiably said or did]), 4. gallicization (names and titles when combined, OK [but members of dynasties that ruled outside France -- Lorraine, Savoy, Modena, Bouillon, Monaco, etc -- shouldn't be gallicized, except for cadets born into a branch naturalised in France]; well-known phrases, yes; untranslatable terms, maybe; just for the sake of a more "French" sound or "feel" to the article -- not usually, and subject to deletion). Other editors will, of course, have their own views. Please don't use sockpuppets. I look forward to better mutual cooperation -- and better Wiki articles. Thanks. FactStraight ( talk) 04:52, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
"Strange Foot Race.—In 1776, the Duchess of Charteris beat her husband in a foot race of 200 yards, for 200 guineas. The Duchess was allowed to secure her petticoats above the knees".("Variates",
The Scottish journal of topography, antiquities, traditions, &c Published, 1848 {{
citation}}
: line feed character in |title=
at position 64 (
help))
Not sure if this curiosity refers to this married couple as the spelling is slightly different, and I am not going to do anything with it. So I will leave it here for anyone who wants to take it further. -- PBS ( talk) 18:01, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello everyone, my name is Ariana and I plan on adding exciting new content to this page! I'm aware that this isn't the most exciting topic for everyone, but I feel that if I were to add new facts from more recent sources, it could be beneficial to those using the page for educational purposes. I also hope to add new sections to this article, such as Egalite's relationship to his cousin, the king, which was crucial to many of the decisions he made during the French Revolution. I hope to see the page flourishing soon! Arianabarron ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
@ Arianabarron:,
1. You reverted last contributor's edit with this edit summary: "Changed my lead paragraph back to its ORIGINAL STATE)" [6]
Further, from Wikipedia's article Please don't shout [8], here is some advice on how to communicate so as not to appear aggressive to others:
Typing in all caps ("TYPING IN ALL CAPS") on Wikipedia, in line with most internet resources, is perceived as "shouting" and can come across as aggressive. Please do not do it, even in edit summaries. More than occasional use of bold, italics and underline is also very 'shouty' behaviour.
2. Also, would you be kind enough to give references to the titles Duke d'Orléans, Hugh Bourbon Capet, Philippe de la France, and Monsieur Philippe d'Orléans, you are giving Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orléans, while removing his real titles, from the one given at birth to those he inherited later on?
3. Reference is also needed at "He was Louis XVI's first cousin and the wealthiest man in France after the King". The Duke of Orléans was probably one of the richest men in France, but not the richest after the king, and no richer than the Duke of Penthièvre, his father-in-law, who was born in wealth & who got richer during his life by wisely running his estates, and thanks to several inheritances. And it is in great part thanks to the dowry of his wife, Penthièvre's daughter, that Orléans was very rich.
Being extremely new at Wikipedia, you may not be aware of the fact that by reverting, with no explanation & no references, you could be starting an edit-war and making it impossible for other contributors to edit the article.
Regards, -- Blue Indigo ( talk) 20:26, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
@ Blue Indigo:
It seems as if your goal since I edited this article is to attack everything I do. I have contributed a lot to this article, not just the lead section, but to other sections of the article, which by the way - are cited with scholarly sources. Before my lead section was removed the first time, the references you are asking about were there. I worked really hard and did a lot of research to improve the article, and I find it really offensive and disrespectful that you have done nothing but criticize this article. Yes, I am new to Wikipedia, but that does not make my information less valuable than its other editors. But do not worry, I won't edit the article anymore. I have finished my class and received positive feedback from my professor, which is all that matters. In regards to your comment on the shouting, there is no need to be ultra sensitive. Typing in caps does not always mean shouting. Regards, Arianabarron ( talk) 00:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Here it is stated “A majority (75 votes) was necessary to indict the King, and an overwhelming amount of 394 votes were collected in favor of his death.” This would suggest that while voting to execute his cousin was a betrayal of sorts it was not consequential in the vote outcome. However the wiki entry for Louis XVI states:
“...the result was uncomfortably close for such a dramatic decision. 288 of the deputies voted against death and for some other alternative, mainly some means of imprisonment or exile. 72 of the deputies voted for the death penalty, but subject to a number of delaying conditions and reservations. The voting took a total of 36 hours. 361 of the deputies voted for Louis's immediate execution. Louis was condemned to death by a majority of one vote.”
That entry indicates the final vote on sentencing was 361-360 if favor of immediate execution versus prison, exile, or delayed execution. If this is accurate then the Duke’s vote was much more consequential. There is a clear discrepancy between the two articles regarding the vote numbers
The result of the move request was: not moved. Rough consensus not to move the article to the proposed title. ( closed by non-admin page mover) – Material Works 17:37, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orléans → Philippe Égalité – Not only is Louis Philippe II not this man's common name, but it is hardly ever used at all. He is commonly called either duke of Orléans/duc d'Orléans or, much more conveniently, Philippe Égalité. The name Philippe Égalité can be found in the titles of numerous biographies. Surtsicna ( talk) 14:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 21:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Unfortunately he is not the only person to be known as the duke of Orléans.That was my point! The 1st Duke of Wellington isn't the only person to be known as the Duke of Wellington either. They're all called the Duke of Wellington. That is their common name. The first names of titled people are very commonly not well-known. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 13:43, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 20 August 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Philippe Égalité. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
can anyone make sense of this sentence?
mcoverdale ( talk) 14:47, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
I suspect that the "comtesse de Buffon" referred to here would be the widow of Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon, but am not sure. If someone knows, worth a link in the article. -- Jmabel 22:41, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)
Similarly, I'd guess "count of Champcenetz" is Louis René de Champcenetz, but I'm not sure. Presumably related, anyway. If someone knows what individual is referred to, a link would be good. -- Jmabel 22:52, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)
Very British biased... 1911 Encyclopedia ? Ericd 20:13, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
A lot of unsourced edits are being uploaded rapidly to articles on French royalty. Some appear dubious, others wrong. Yet requests for reputable citations are ignored, deleted, or inadequately sourced (page numbers in books are essential to verify if the citation is accurate) -- while the wholesale editing continues. Please respond to these requests, either with reputable sources or more careful edits, before adding additional unsourced material. Also, much of the added material is redundant, excessive, or trivial. I've already recorded repeated objections to 1. unsourced allegations (e.g. that seem unprecedented, unlikely, or undocumentable) are apt to be deleted unless precisely sourced 2. redundancies (if it's in a box on the page, it's apt to be deleted from the text): 3. excess (details which belong in another person's article [e.g. parent, spouse, child], or which describe hard-to-verify details [e.g. "She felt envious": unless it's an attributed quote from a diary or correspondence -- how is it possible to know what someone who died hundreds of years ago "felt" or "thought"? Let's stick to what they verifiably said or did]), 4. gallicization (names and titles when combined, OK [but members of dynasties that ruled outside France -- Lorraine, Savoy, Modena, Bouillon, Monaco, etc -- shouldn't be gallicized, except for cadets born into a branch naturalised in France]; well-known phrases, yes; untranslatable terms, maybe; just for the sake of a more "French" sound or "feel" to the article -- not usually, and subject to deletion). Other editors will, of course, have their own views. Please don't use sockpuppets. I look forward to better mutual cooperation -- and better Wiki articles. Thanks. FactStraight ( talk) 04:52, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
"Strange Foot Race.—In 1776, the Duchess of Charteris beat her husband in a foot race of 200 yards, for 200 guineas. The Duchess was allowed to secure her petticoats above the knees".("Variates",
The Scottish journal of topography, antiquities, traditions, &c Published, 1848 {{
citation}}
: line feed character in |title=
at position 64 (
help))
Not sure if this curiosity refers to this married couple as the spelling is slightly different, and I am not going to do anything with it. So I will leave it here for anyone who wants to take it further. -- PBS ( talk) 18:01, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello everyone, my name is Ariana and I plan on adding exciting new content to this page! I'm aware that this isn't the most exciting topic for everyone, but I feel that if I were to add new facts from more recent sources, it could be beneficial to those using the page for educational purposes. I also hope to add new sections to this article, such as Egalite's relationship to his cousin, the king, which was crucial to many of the decisions he made during the French Revolution. I hope to see the page flourishing soon! Arianabarron ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
@ Arianabarron:,
1. You reverted last contributor's edit with this edit summary: "Changed my lead paragraph back to its ORIGINAL STATE)" [6]
Further, from Wikipedia's article Please don't shout [8], here is some advice on how to communicate so as not to appear aggressive to others:
Typing in all caps ("TYPING IN ALL CAPS") on Wikipedia, in line with most internet resources, is perceived as "shouting" and can come across as aggressive. Please do not do it, even in edit summaries. More than occasional use of bold, italics and underline is also very 'shouty' behaviour.
2. Also, would you be kind enough to give references to the titles Duke d'Orléans, Hugh Bourbon Capet, Philippe de la France, and Monsieur Philippe d'Orléans, you are giving Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orléans, while removing his real titles, from the one given at birth to those he inherited later on?
3. Reference is also needed at "He was Louis XVI's first cousin and the wealthiest man in France after the King". The Duke of Orléans was probably one of the richest men in France, but not the richest after the king, and no richer than the Duke of Penthièvre, his father-in-law, who was born in wealth & who got richer during his life by wisely running his estates, and thanks to several inheritances. And it is in great part thanks to the dowry of his wife, Penthièvre's daughter, that Orléans was very rich.
Being extremely new at Wikipedia, you may not be aware of the fact that by reverting, with no explanation & no references, you could be starting an edit-war and making it impossible for other contributors to edit the article.
Regards, -- Blue Indigo ( talk) 20:26, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
@ Blue Indigo:
It seems as if your goal since I edited this article is to attack everything I do. I have contributed a lot to this article, not just the lead section, but to other sections of the article, which by the way - are cited with scholarly sources. Before my lead section was removed the first time, the references you are asking about were there. I worked really hard and did a lot of research to improve the article, and I find it really offensive and disrespectful that you have done nothing but criticize this article. Yes, I am new to Wikipedia, but that does not make my information less valuable than its other editors. But do not worry, I won't edit the article anymore. I have finished my class and received positive feedback from my professor, which is all that matters. In regards to your comment on the shouting, there is no need to be ultra sensitive. Typing in caps does not always mean shouting. Regards, Arianabarron ( talk) 00:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Here it is stated “A majority (75 votes) was necessary to indict the King, and an overwhelming amount of 394 votes were collected in favor of his death.” This would suggest that while voting to execute his cousin was a betrayal of sorts it was not consequential in the vote outcome. However the wiki entry for Louis XVI states:
“...the result was uncomfortably close for such a dramatic decision. 288 of the deputies voted against death and for some other alternative, mainly some means of imprisonment or exile. 72 of the deputies voted for the death penalty, but subject to a number of delaying conditions and reservations. The voting took a total of 36 hours. 361 of the deputies voted for Louis's immediate execution. Louis was condemned to death by a majority of one vote.”
That entry indicates the final vote on sentencing was 361-360 if favor of immediate execution versus prison, exile, or delayed execution. If this is accurate then the Duke’s vote was much more consequential. There is a clear discrepancy between the two articles regarding the vote numbers
The result of the move request was: not moved. Rough consensus not to move the article to the proposed title. ( closed by non-admin page mover) – Material Works 17:37, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orléans → Philippe Égalité – Not only is Louis Philippe II not this man's common name, but it is hardly ever used at all. He is commonly called either duke of Orléans/duc d'Orléans or, much more conveniently, Philippe Égalité. The name Philippe Égalité can be found in the titles of numerous biographies. Surtsicna ( talk) 14:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 21:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Unfortunately he is not the only person to be known as the duke of Orléans.That was my point! The 1st Duke of Wellington isn't the only person to be known as the Duke of Wellington either. They're all called the Duke of Wellington. That is their common name. The first names of titled people are very commonly not well-known. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 13:43, 21 August 2023 (UTC)