This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Maximilien Robespierre article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 180 days
![]() |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Maximilien Robespierre. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Maximilien Robespierre at the Reference desk. |
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Show
citation statistics for
CS1 and
CS2 citation elements in the article.
Stats: unnamed refs = 404; named refs = 61; self closed = 51. Click show for details.
|
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 28, 2004, July 28, 2005, July 28, 2006, July 28, 2007, July 28, 2008, July 28, 2013, July 28, 2017, July 28, 2018, and July 28, 2021. |
I just deleted the template, nobody seems to be interested in leaving a comment. Besides the template frightens people to read the article which is not what we want. The amount of visitors dropped considerably within a few days which is not what I like to see. Regards, Taksen ( talk) 07:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Most people will only stay a few seconds/perhaps a few minutes and then decide to leave. Unfortunately Wikipedia does not show this. Take a look at simple:Maximilian Robespierre. It is short but pretty good. Somehow it should mentioned in the template. Another option is too mention the article on French Revolution, which deals with the same topic. One can easily see how complicated this topic is. (A biography of Robespierre is actually an account on the French Revolution; that is why the article is so long.) I asked ChatGPT to improve several sections but it is a lot of work to go through the rest. I can only do a limited amount of text a day. If nobody responds I will delete the template again. We do not need head teachers but people who participate. Taksen ( talk) 06:17, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Because of an edit conflict I was not able to make improvements. I am not interested in improving templates and its talk pages. I specialize on the content. Please do not tell me to "feel free". Again you try to put me at work and you can lay back. Taksen ( talk) 06:50, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
To my surprise someone recently added the same template to the article on the French Revolution; is this a new wave? He added: I leave that to editors more familiar with the literature. Horrible, I would not comment on articles which I do not understand or not familiar with. It seems also to be your problem. Taksen ( talk) 08:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC) I'm not so interested in people who do not "feel" responsible for their actions. Taksen ( talk) 10:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC) I hope Wikipedia will limit one day the activities of people who only drop a template and who are not interested in the consequences and further development of the article. Taksen ( talk) 18:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
I have reverted the videolinks previously reverted by Nikkimaria and restored by Taksen, for three reasons: (1) Not clear if all of those links meet copyright concerns, as set out in WP:VIDEOLINK; (2) Comments about the themes and "balance" of the videolinks, without supporting cites, infringes NPOV and WP:OR; (3) Taksen can't have it both ways, and say that Nikkimaria can't put the TOOLONG template up without doing something, and then revert it right away when Nikkimaria starts cutting the article to comply with the standard page limits. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz ( talk) 17:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
I don't know how to link to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_is_not_paper
but this is what is written there: Taksen ( talk) 05:16, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
The most obvious difference is that there are, in principle, no size limits in the Wikipedia universe. It is quite possible, for example, that when you finish typing in everything you want to say about poker, there might well be over 100 pages, and enough text for a full-length book by itself. This would certainly never be tolerated in a paper encyclopedia, which is why Encyclopædia Britannica has such limited information on the topic (and on most other topics).
and from the same article:
While some articles may appear lengthy to readers unfamiliar with the subject matter, it's crucial to distinguish personal opinions about their length. Such judgments are more appropriately expressed on the talk page rather than being prominently featured at the top of the article. Taksen ( talk) 05:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
December 1793 is a crucial month regarding the reign of terror. I moved some of the details to Le Vieux Cordelier but that article only has about ten/fifteen readers a day. That means that information gets lost. The context - the discussion with Desmoulins, who protected Danton, the suicide of Clavière, and the arrests and executions in December - should not disappear. Taksen ( talk) 06:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
While there is room for improvement in the article, the current template is inaccurately applied. It has not undergone discussion, and the presence of numerous sections and subsections contradicts the assertion presented to the reader. A more accurate evaluation should be considered before displaying such information. Taksen ( talk) 06:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
I'm concerned that shortening the article may result in the omission of events and accusations against Robespierre, which might be intentional. Taksen ( talk) 05:56, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Get support here, and not on my talk page, Taksen ( talk) 03:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
According to the intro and infobox, Robespierre died on 10 Thermidor. However, the second paragraph in the "Execution" section currently lists the sequence of events thusly: 1) the Revolutionary Tribunal assembled at noon on 10 Thermidor, 2) Robespierre & Co. were accused of being counter-revolutionary and sentenced to death at 2 a.m. [which would be 14 hours later on 11 Thermidor], 3) Rob & Co. were taken away to be executed at 6 p.m. [another 16 hours later].
So, A) is the "2 a.m." really supposed to be "2 p.m."; B) "2 a.m." refers only to when they were accused of being counter-revolutionary (i.e. arrested) and not when they were sentenced, and therefore that event should be split off and listed before the information about when the Tribunal met; or C) they really did wait thirty hours and executed him on the 11th? 104.184.182.119 ( talk) 09:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I just want to signal that the legacy section is missing a large amount of French historiography in recent years. Of course, some of that isn’t getting a lot of attention in English literature, but most of it is very important, and marks a new development in research concerning Robespierre. The section on fr.wiki on the legacy of Robespierre mentions a call by all mainstream center-left and left-wing parties to rehabilitate Robespierre, published by Le Monde, at the end. Nothing about any of that here. The research of Jean-Clément Martin is also missing. Both en.wiki and fr.wiki are missing modern political reappropriations like that of La France Insoumise, and there is no word yet on the criticism of the "proto-communist" approach. I’m planning on working on it myself, but since one user, @ Taksen: has been working on this article for years now, I would like to know their opinion about this. Encyclopédisme ( talk) 23:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I noticed your changes on the Revolutionary Tribunal but never commented. I will add some to the talk page. Here is what strikes me on your latest changes on Robespierre:
Good afternoon! Nikkimaria suggested putting the question on the talk page. Link to our "Talk" - User talk:Nikkimaria
I would be grateful if additional information is included in the article, which will make the controversial idea of Robespierre's appearance more objective.
Sources confirming the accuracy of the information provided and the existing controversy (in the links):
"Robespierre's appearance also causes controversy and a subject of study. In 2000, the German Historical Museum discovered a previously unknown lifetime version of the portrait of Robespierre, another version of which is kept in the Musée Carnavalet ".
Illustration - https://us-west-1.cdn.h5p.com/orgs/1291571515093333268/organization/content/1291593982462265978/images/file-60e314790ed04.jpg
https://www.amis-robespierre.org/Madame-Tussaud-et-le-masque-de
https://www.dhm.de/bildung/ida/revolutionen/1789/#c14167
https://agorha.inha.fr/ark:/54721/6cf4137d-dfd1-462e-bdd6-d63a7f33bfa4
The number of sources can be increased. Thermidor58 ( talk) 10:27, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Maximilien Robespierre article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 180 days
![]() |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Maximilien Robespierre. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Maximilien Robespierre at the Reference desk. |
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Show
citation statistics for
CS1 and
CS2 citation elements in the article.
Stats: unnamed refs = 404; named refs = 61; self closed = 51. Click show for details.
|
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 28, 2004, July 28, 2005, July 28, 2006, July 28, 2007, July 28, 2008, July 28, 2013, July 28, 2017, July 28, 2018, and July 28, 2021. |
I just deleted the template, nobody seems to be interested in leaving a comment. Besides the template frightens people to read the article which is not what we want. The amount of visitors dropped considerably within a few days which is not what I like to see. Regards, Taksen ( talk) 07:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Most people will only stay a few seconds/perhaps a few minutes and then decide to leave. Unfortunately Wikipedia does not show this. Take a look at simple:Maximilian Robespierre. It is short but pretty good. Somehow it should mentioned in the template. Another option is too mention the article on French Revolution, which deals with the same topic. One can easily see how complicated this topic is. (A biography of Robespierre is actually an account on the French Revolution; that is why the article is so long.) I asked ChatGPT to improve several sections but it is a lot of work to go through the rest. I can only do a limited amount of text a day. If nobody responds I will delete the template again. We do not need head teachers but people who participate. Taksen ( talk) 06:17, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Because of an edit conflict I was not able to make improvements. I am not interested in improving templates and its talk pages. I specialize on the content. Please do not tell me to "feel free". Again you try to put me at work and you can lay back. Taksen ( talk) 06:50, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
To my surprise someone recently added the same template to the article on the French Revolution; is this a new wave? He added: I leave that to editors more familiar with the literature. Horrible, I would not comment on articles which I do not understand or not familiar with. It seems also to be your problem. Taksen ( talk) 08:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC) I'm not so interested in people who do not "feel" responsible for their actions. Taksen ( talk) 10:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC) I hope Wikipedia will limit one day the activities of people who only drop a template and who are not interested in the consequences and further development of the article. Taksen ( talk) 18:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
I have reverted the videolinks previously reverted by Nikkimaria and restored by Taksen, for three reasons: (1) Not clear if all of those links meet copyright concerns, as set out in WP:VIDEOLINK; (2) Comments about the themes and "balance" of the videolinks, without supporting cites, infringes NPOV and WP:OR; (3) Taksen can't have it both ways, and say that Nikkimaria can't put the TOOLONG template up without doing something, and then revert it right away when Nikkimaria starts cutting the article to comply with the standard page limits. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz ( talk) 17:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
I don't know how to link to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_is_not_paper
but this is what is written there: Taksen ( talk) 05:16, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
The most obvious difference is that there are, in principle, no size limits in the Wikipedia universe. It is quite possible, for example, that when you finish typing in everything you want to say about poker, there might well be over 100 pages, and enough text for a full-length book by itself. This would certainly never be tolerated in a paper encyclopedia, which is why Encyclopædia Britannica has such limited information on the topic (and on most other topics).
and from the same article:
While some articles may appear lengthy to readers unfamiliar with the subject matter, it's crucial to distinguish personal opinions about their length. Such judgments are more appropriately expressed on the talk page rather than being prominently featured at the top of the article. Taksen ( talk) 05:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
December 1793 is a crucial month regarding the reign of terror. I moved some of the details to Le Vieux Cordelier but that article only has about ten/fifteen readers a day. That means that information gets lost. The context - the discussion with Desmoulins, who protected Danton, the suicide of Clavière, and the arrests and executions in December - should not disappear. Taksen ( talk) 06:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
While there is room for improvement in the article, the current template is inaccurately applied. It has not undergone discussion, and the presence of numerous sections and subsections contradicts the assertion presented to the reader. A more accurate evaluation should be considered before displaying such information. Taksen ( talk) 06:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
I'm concerned that shortening the article may result in the omission of events and accusations against Robespierre, which might be intentional. Taksen ( talk) 05:56, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Get support here, and not on my talk page, Taksen ( talk) 03:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
According to the intro and infobox, Robespierre died on 10 Thermidor. However, the second paragraph in the "Execution" section currently lists the sequence of events thusly: 1) the Revolutionary Tribunal assembled at noon on 10 Thermidor, 2) Robespierre & Co. were accused of being counter-revolutionary and sentenced to death at 2 a.m. [which would be 14 hours later on 11 Thermidor], 3) Rob & Co. were taken away to be executed at 6 p.m. [another 16 hours later].
So, A) is the "2 a.m." really supposed to be "2 p.m."; B) "2 a.m." refers only to when they were accused of being counter-revolutionary (i.e. arrested) and not when they were sentenced, and therefore that event should be split off and listed before the information about when the Tribunal met; or C) they really did wait thirty hours and executed him on the 11th? 104.184.182.119 ( talk) 09:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I just want to signal that the legacy section is missing a large amount of French historiography in recent years. Of course, some of that isn’t getting a lot of attention in English literature, but most of it is very important, and marks a new development in research concerning Robespierre. The section on fr.wiki on the legacy of Robespierre mentions a call by all mainstream center-left and left-wing parties to rehabilitate Robespierre, published by Le Monde, at the end. Nothing about any of that here. The research of Jean-Clément Martin is also missing. Both en.wiki and fr.wiki are missing modern political reappropriations like that of La France Insoumise, and there is no word yet on the criticism of the "proto-communist" approach. I’m planning on working on it myself, but since one user, @ Taksen: has been working on this article for years now, I would like to know their opinion about this. Encyclopédisme ( talk) 23:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I noticed your changes on the Revolutionary Tribunal but never commented. I will add some to the talk page. Here is what strikes me on your latest changes on Robespierre:
Good afternoon! Nikkimaria suggested putting the question on the talk page. Link to our "Talk" - User talk:Nikkimaria
I would be grateful if additional information is included in the article, which will make the controversial idea of Robespierre's appearance more objective.
Sources confirming the accuracy of the information provided and the existing controversy (in the links):
"Robespierre's appearance also causes controversy and a subject of study. In 2000, the German Historical Museum discovered a previously unknown lifetime version of the portrait of Robespierre, another version of which is kept in the Musée Carnavalet ".
Illustration - https://us-west-1.cdn.h5p.com/orgs/1291571515093333268/organization/content/1291593982462265978/images/file-60e314790ed04.jpg
https://www.amis-robespierre.org/Madame-Tussaud-et-le-masque-de
https://www.dhm.de/bildung/ida/revolutionen/1789/#c14167
https://agorha.inha.fr/ark:/54721/6cf4137d-dfd1-462e-bdd6-d63a7f33bfa4
The number of sources can be increased. Thermidor58 ( talk) 10:27, 5 June 2024 (UTC)