This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Strasbourg 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 |
|
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Amazing that not a word is spared on the ethnicity of the people, their language, their allegiance, or anything remotely threatening to the French overloards of the city and the provincd of Alsace. Well done Wiki, well done.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7000:9900:5B67:4464:FBF2:FEB3:33A2 ( talk) 00:21, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
There's been tag on the article for a year now, asking for information to be included from the fr.wiki article. This is almost certainly a good idea, as the fr.wiki article is unsurprisingly much more comprehensive - but which parts in particular would editors like to seen brought over? Knepflerle ( talk) 13:58, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
--Uhh, it notes in the text that King Phillip of Swabia granted the city of Strassbourg the status of Imperial Free City in 1262, but on the King Phillip of Swabia page it notes that he died in 1208. Since he would have been dead for 54 years by the time he granted Strassbourg that status, it seems unlikely that he was responsible. Voxexmachina ( talk) 05:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Uhh! Funny what? This is but one of hundreds of times that extant printed pages or handwritten pages of information conflict with our existing chronology! Since this is but one of hundreds, just how is it now explained? 96.19.156.227 ( talk) 20:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes
According to the WP article, Leroux was born in Italy, not Strasbourg. Does anyone know any more than I do about this? LynwoodF. 213.48.46.141 ( talk) 11:12, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
An anonymous edit without an edit summary was claiming a Greek origin for the element -bourg or -burg. It is certainly cognate with English borough and may well also be cognate with a similar Greek word, but I have no evidence that it is derived from Greek. I have undone what is no doubt a good-faith, but naïve edit. LynwoodF ( talk) 19:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Discussion moved to
User talk:LynwoodF
|
---|
Le plus surprenant en regardant ton profil c'est que tu es probablement francophile (on n'apprend pas le francais, et on n'affiche pas les armoiries du Dauphiné par hasard). Aussi j'imagine que ma contribution à été perdue dans la traduction. Mon intervention était liée uniquement au mot bourg, sans lien direct avec la ville dont est liée la page de discussion. Bonne continuation -- Gabriel Haute Maurienne ( talk) 13:06, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Re LynwoodF étant donné que cette partie de la discussion n'est pas liée à l'article, permet moi de te répondre en francais puisque tu le maîtrise sans doute mieux que moi l'anglais. Pour l'origine grecque, je pense, mais je n'ai pas de certitude ni de source, que c'est probablement lié à la version qui soutient l'origine latine du terme. Partant de là, il est techniquement possible d'arguer de la réflexion suivante: étant donné que de nombreux mots latins viennent du grec, il est probable que bourg en provienne également toujours selon cette théorie. A croire les hellénophones, toutes les langues viennent du grec 😜. Enfin pour le déclin de certaines langues régionales frontalières, si beaucoup ne faisait pas le raccourci entre racine du dialecte parlé = nationalité je suis sûr que leur statut se porterait bien mieux. Ce n'est pas un hasard si de nombreux dialectes germaniques ont drastiquement régressé après les deux guerres mondiales, ou certains ont justifié leurs annexions territoriale unilatérales forcées sur ce simple critère. Enfin si tu jettes un œil sur les deux discussions que j'ai en ce moment, tu constateras que certains semblent mélanger réalité et fantasmes de grandeurs, quitte à inventer des sources qui s'autoalimentent. Amicalement -- Gabriel Haute Maurienne ( talk) 15:27, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
|
What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content! Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 ( talk) 09:01, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Strasbourg. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:00, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
There has been a difference of opinion today about the use of this term. Here is my contribution to the discussion:
LynwoodF ( talk) 14:18, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
The geography section of the article starts:
My first reaction was to say that is wrong, on the grounds that Ill continues to flow north parallel to the Rhine for c.20km before the two rivers actually meet. But then I began to doubt. Certainly that is what modern maps show, but they also show several waterways linking the two rivers in Strasbourg. Those waterways have canal names, and look like canals, but appearances and names can be deceptive, and it wouldn't be the first time a natural watercourse had been obliterated by its conversion into a much wider and straighter canal.
So I guess my question is, before people started digging extra channels, was there a natural connection between the Ill and the Rhine in Strasbourg, or is the only natural channel of the Ill the one that continues down to Offendorf before entering the Rhine. Either way, I think we need to elaborate that sentence, but best to know the facts (and pick up a cite or two) first. -- chris_j_wood ( talk) 16:41, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Just a remind. Some important naming conventions which the article's lead violates ( WP:LEAD#General guidelines and WP:LEAD#Separate section usage): Once a Names or Etymology section or paragraph is created, the alternative English or foreign names should not be moved back to the first line. As an exception, a local official name different from a widely accepted English name should be retained in the lead. (Foreign language: Local name; known also by several alternative names)".' If the case is exceptional, common sense may be applied to ignore all rules. Please discuss to decide if this is an exceptional case. 2A02:2430:3:2500:0:0:B807:3DA0 ( talk) 03:55, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
I made a small mistake with this edit: the author is Noëlla Richard, not Richard Noëlla. See also https://publication-theses.unistra.fr/public/memoires/2012/IEP/2012_RICHARD_Noella.pdf for the full text. -- Edelseider ( talk) 14:35, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
The user keep changing the sentence that was the fruit of a consensus. It is not accurate to state that the region was historically German speaking, since, many Germanic/alemanic languages and to to some extend romances dialects were initially spoken and are still spoken in the area. I tried to change it in many way (Germanic/alemanic) in order to reach a consensus, but he keeps reverting it to his initial edit. And finally attack me on my talk page saying that I'm an anti German person. I want to be clear by saying that the statement that he wants to change was here long before his intervention. And I just tried to keep it this way, I'm not the initiator of this war edit. I invited him many times to settle this issue on the talk page and he refused, preferring personal attacks on my talk page. I insist here by saying that the statement "historically German speaking" is not accurate since the standard German came in the region late and that most of the natives still now are speaking a Germanic dialect at home wich is different from the standard German. It is not correct to reduce the importance, the varieties and the cultural wealth of the different local dialects to the standard German. This German based IP contributor is new to wiki, and he is focused to add the word German, or a German translation of Alsatian names even in articles where a German translation is not relevant. This is not in the charter of Wikipedia to make personal attacks when we have a different on an article. He keeps saying that I should bring sources, eventhough and doesn't have any to sustain his affirmations.-- Gabriel HM ( talk) 14:54, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi Lynwood, thanks for you kind comment. I think that I know who is this IP. Furthermore I suspect this anonymous users to be in fact Renekm specialised in former German Territorites and its German name mostly during the nazi era, and that spends most of his time to give German names to all territories, cities, communes, provinces, forts etc [1] without any distinction, and even naming French maginot forts with a German translation, wich is very weird [2]. Indeed his last post under his name was just before I reverted his edit, and in the following hours he disappeared from Wikipedia, and the anonymous IP appeared and started to to do the same. It is shameful for lnguit and the wealth of the dialects and regional languages to truly to reduce them as nothing than the main standard form.
"Historically" means "in the past" and not the current situation. Historic developments should be adressed as such. The university of Strasburg e.g. was teaching in German until the revolution and not in Alsatian. There is a difference when speaking about the distant past. -- 78.55.50.76 ( talk) 17:56, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The beginning of the section "1918 to the present" should be reworked. It was apparently written by someone with the aim of downplaying support for France in Strasbourg in 1918. Several points appear dubious or are missing:
ព្រះមហាក្សត្ររាជ ( talk) 14:37, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Material from Strasbourg was split to History of Strasbourg on 29 May 2017 from this version. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Strasbourg. 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) 21:30, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Is this a joke? Do we really expect people to confuse Strasbourg and Salzburg?
I tried to remove it but got a bunch of crazy template warnings in the preview. Can someone who knows how to do it please remove this absolutely nonsensical disambiguation? -- 91.34.39.52 ( talk) 21:54, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
As far as I know, Strasbourg is the second river port in France. Nantes, Rouen and Bordeaux are in Esturies, with sea ships.
According to French wiki, Paris is the first river harbour ( Il est le deuxième port fluvial de France après le Port autonome de Paris et le deuxième port rhénan après Duisbourg .)
2A01:CB10:5AF:8C00:88FF:8A9E:5628:752D (
talk)
08:54, 23 October 2019 (UTC) Jerome
The German name should be given more prominence. It should appear in the native name section of the infobox, and also be put directly after the French name. I'm well aware that Alsace has its own vernacular(s), but Hochdeutsch has been used there intermittently in an official capacity and it is widely taught in schools.- 86.180.91.149 ( talk) 14:31, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 14:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Strasbourg 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 |
|
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Amazing that not a word is spared on the ethnicity of the people, their language, their allegiance, or anything remotely threatening to the French overloards of the city and the provincd of Alsace. Well done Wiki, well done.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7000:9900:5B67:4464:FBF2:FEB3:33A2 ( talk) 00:21, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
There's been tag on the article for a year now, asking for information to be included from the fr.wiki article. This is almost certainly a good idea, as the fr.wiki article is unsurprisingly much more comprehensive - but which parts in particular would editors like to seen brought over? Knepflerle ( talk) 13:58, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
--Uhh, it notes in the text that King Phillip of Swabia granted the city of Strassbourg the status of Imperial Free City in 1262, but on the King Phillip of Swabia page it notes that he died in 1208. Since he would have been dead for 54 years by the time he granted Strassbourg that status, it seems unlikely that he was responsible. Voxexmachina ( talk) 05:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Uhh! Funny what? This is but one of hundreds of times that extant printed pages or handwritten pages of information conflict with our existing chronology! Since this is but one of hundreds, just how is it now explained? 96.19.156.227 ( talk) 20:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes
According to the WP article, Leroux was born in Italy, not Strasbourg. Does anyone know any more than I do about this? LynwoodF. 213.48.46.141 ( talk) 11:12, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
An anonymous edit without an edit summary was claiming a Greek origin for the element -bourg or -burg. It is certainly cognate with English borough and may well also be cognate with a similar Greek word, but I have no evidence that it is derived from Greek. I have undone what is no doubt a good-faith, but naïve edit. LynwoodF ( talk) 19:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Discussion moved to
User talk:LynwoodF
|
---|
Le plus surprenant en regardant ton profil c'est que tu es probablement francophile (on n'apprend pas le francais, et on n'affiche pas les armoiries du Dauphiné par hasard). Aussi j'imagine que ma contribution à été perdue dans la traduction. Mon intervention était liée uniquement au mot bourg, sans lien direct avec la ville dont est liée la page de discussion. Bonne continuation -- Gabriel Haute Maurienne ( talk) 13:06, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Re LynwoodF étant donné que cette partie de la discussion n'est pas liée à l'article, permet moi de te répondre en francais puisque tu le maîtrise sans doute mieux que moi l'anglais. Pour l'origine grecque, je pense, mais je n'ai pas de certitude ni de source, que c'est probablement lié à la version qui soutient l'origine latine du terme. Partant de là, il est techniquement possible d'arguer de la réflexion suivante: étant donné que de nombreux mots latins viennent du grec, il est probable que bourg en provienne également toujours selon cette théorie. A croire les hellénophones, toutes les langues viennent du grec 😜. Enfin pour le déclin de certaines langues régionales frontalières, si beaucoup ne faisait pas le raccourci entre racine du dialecte parlé = nationalité je suis sûr que leur statut se porterait bien mieux. Ce n'est pas un hasard si de nombreux dialectes germaniques ont drastiquement régressé après les deux guerres mondiales, ou certains ont justifié leurs annexions territoriale unilatérales forcées sur ce simple critère. Enfin si tu jettes un œil sur les deux discussions que j'ai en ce moment, tu constateras que certains semblent mélanger réalité et fantasmes de grandeurs, quitte à inventer des sources qui s'autoalimentent. Amicalement -- Gabriel Haute Maurienne ( talk) 15:27, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
|
What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content! Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 ( talk) 09:01, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Strasbourg. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:00, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
There has been a difference of opinion today about the use of this term. Here is my contribution to the discussion:
LynwoodF ( talk) 14:18, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
The geography section of the article starts:
My first reaction was to say that is wrong, on the grounds that Ill continues to flow north parallel to the Rhine for c.20km before the two rivers actually meet. But then I began to doubt. Certainly that is what modern maps show, but they also show several waterways linking the two rivers in Strasbourg. Those waterways have canal names, and look like canals, but appearances and names can be deceptive, and it wouldn't be the first time a natural watercourse had been obliterated by its conversion into a much wider and straighter canal.
So I guess my question is, before people started digging extra channels, was there a natural connection between the Ill and the Rhine in Strasbourg, or is the only natural channel of the Ill the one that continues down to Offendorf before entering the Rhine. Either way, I think we need to elaborate that sentence, but best to know the facts (and pick up a cite or two) first. -- chris_j_wood ( talk) 16:41, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Just a remind. Some important naming conventions which the article's lead violates ( WP:LEAD#General guidelines and WP:LEAD#Separate section usage): Once a Names or Etymology section or paragraph is created, the alternative English or foreign names should not be moved back to the first line. As an exception, a local official name different from a widely accepted English name should be retained in the lead. (Foreign language: Local name; known also by several alternative names)".' If the case is exceptional, common sense may be applied to ignore all rules. Please discuss to decide if this is an exceptional case. 2A02:2430:3:2500:0:0:B807:3DA0 ( talk) 03:55, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
I made a small mistake with this edit: the author is Noëlla Richard, not Richard Noëlla. See also https://publication-theses.unistra.fr/public/memoires/2012/IEP/2012_RICHARD_Noella.pdf for the full text. -- Edelseider ( talk) 14:35, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
The user keep changing the sentence that was the fruit of a consensus. It is not accurate to state that the region was historically German speaking, since, many Germanic/alemanic languages and to to some extend romances dialects were initially spoken and are still spoken in the area. I tried to change it in many way (Germanic/alemanic) in order to reach a consensus, but he keeps reverting it to his initial edit. And finally attack me on my talk page saying that I'm an anti German person. I want to be clear by saying that the statement that he wants to change was here long before his intervention. And I just tried to keep it this way, I'm not the initiator of this war edit. I invited him many times to settle this issue on the talk page and he refused, preferring personal attacks on my talk page. I insist here by saying that the statement "historically German speaking" is not accurate since the standard German came in the region late and that most of the natives still now are speaking a Germanic dialect at home wich is different from the standard German. It is not correct to reduce the importance, the varieties and the cultural wealth of the different local dialects to the standard German. This German based IP contributor is new to wiki, and he is focused to add the word German, or a German translation of Alsatian names even in articles where a German translation is not relevant. This is not in the charter of Wikipedia to make personal attacks when we have a different on an article. He keeps saying that I should bring sources, eventhough and doesn't have any to sustain his affirmations.-- Gabriel HM ( talk) 14:54, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi Lynwood, thanks for you kind comment. I think that I know who is this IP. Furthermore I suspect this anonymous users to be in fact Renekm specialised in former German Territorites and its German name mostly during the nazi era, and that spends most of his time to give German names to all territories, cities, communes, provinces, forts etc [1] without any distinction, and even naming French maginot forts with a German translation, wich is very weird [2]. Indeed his last post under his name was just before I reverted his edit, and in the following hours he disappeared from Wikipedia, and the anonymous IP appeared and started to to do the same. It is shameful for lnguit and the wealth of the dialects and regional languages to truly to reduce them as nothing than the main standard form.
"Historically" means "in the past" and not the current situation. Historic developments should be adressed as such. The university of Strasburg e.g. was teaching in German until the revolution and not in Alsatian. There is a difference when speaking about the distant past. -- 78.55.50.76 ( talk) 17:56, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
The beginning of the section "1918 to the present" should be reworked. It was apparently written by someone with the aim of downplaying support for France in Strasbourg in 1918. Several points appear dubious or are missing:
ព្រះមហាក្សត្ររាជ ( talk) 14:37, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Material from Strasbourg was split to History of Strasbourg on 29 May 2017 from this version. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Strasbourg. 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) 21:30, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Is this a joke? Do we really expect people to confuse Strasbourg and Salzburg?
I tried to remove it but got a bunch of crazy template warnings in the preview. Can someone who knows how to do it please remove this absolutely nonsensical disambiguation? -- 91.34.39.52 ( talk) 21:54, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
As far as I know, Strasbourg is the second river port in France. Nantes, Rouen and Bordeaux are in Esturies, with sea ships.
According to French wiki, Paris is the first river harbour ( Il est le deuxième port fluvial de France après le Port autonome de Paris et le deuxième port rhénan après Duisbourg .)
2A01:CB10:5AF:8C00:88FF:8A9E:5628:752D (
talk)
08:54, 23 October 2019 (UTC) Jerome
The German name should be given more prominence. It should appear in the native name section of the infobox, and also be put directly after the French name. I'm well aware that Alsace has its own vernacular(s), but Hochdeutsch has been used there intermittently in an official capacity and it is widely taught in schools.- 86.180.91.149 ( talk) 14:31, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 14:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)