Jump to content

Talk:France: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
rm forum
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
There is an unacurate information.

France had the second largest colonial Empire and not the third.



'''{{talkheader}}'''
'''{{talkheader}}'''
{{todo}}
{{todo}}

Revision as of 03:48, 22 April 2009

There is an unacurate information.

France had the second largest colonial Empire and not the third.


Guidelines for editing the France article
  • Units in metric should be spelled out with the converted Imperial units abbreviated in parentheses per Manual of Style.
  • Only external links pertaining to France as a whole, or official government of France links are solicited on this page. Please add other links in their respective articles.
  • All sections are a summary of more detailed articles. If you find any points missing, please add it in the section's main article rather than on this page to keep this page size within reasonable limits.

FRENCH ECONOMY

This page is useless I need to know the latitude and longitude of france not which countries surround it!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.111.166 (talk) 00:18, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I LOOKED AT THE ECONOMY SECTION OF FRANCE AND SAW THAT CHANGES HAVE NOT BEEN MADE YET. GDP NOMINAL IS FROM 2006 AND WE ARE NOW IN 2008, IT SHOULD BE 2.8 TRILLION USD AND 41,000 USD PER CAPITA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elvisbajro (talk • contribs) 16:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

France is no longer the sixth largest economy but [the eighth] [1] Per PPP, France is just [33rd.] [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by BreizhAtav (talk • contribs) 23:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right, France has just the EIGHT GDP at PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) and the SIX at nominal prices. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.53.110.3 (talk) 21:07, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

and there empire was not one of the largest it was the 7th largest jeez —Preceding unsigned comment added by Owehweghksdqgkedg (talk • contribs) 15:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you understand the sentence? one of the largest didn't mean the largest. So the 7th largest empire could be defined as one of the largest.

Image copyright problem with Image:Schuman Declaration.jpg

The image Image:Schuman Declaration.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC) HOLY CRAP I CANT FEEL MY LEGS;] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.107.203.30 (talk) 20:42, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely etymology for France. The name of the weapon "Francisca" is derived from the tribal name "Frank", NOT the other way round

This Wikipedia article falsely attributes the actual tribal name "Frank" (and hence the name "France") to the name of the throwing-axe weapon they used, the "Francisca" in Latin, or an alleged hypothetical name "Frankon". This is not credible. It is clearly attested that the name of this weapon came into Latin specifically because it was noted by Romans that this weapon was used by the Franks in battle. The name Franko(n) was the name that the Franks later applied to their domain, which was known in Latin as Francia, and ultimately became the name France.
Perhaps the authors of this article should consult the Wikipedia French language article on the Franks. The ultimate Germanic origin of the name "FRANK" is probably from a Germanic root "FREK-",. For example, "FREKKR" in Norse means "fierce, bold, valiant" .
I also found the Anglo-Saxon word "FRECA" which literally means "warrior, hero" and is attested in Beowulf, sometimes used to mean "wolf".
I was able to find support for this in the literature. In the book "An Historical Geography of France", by Panhol, Claval, and Lloyd, it is stated that this etymology was the interpratation of Isidore of Seville in the 7th century:
"A feritate morum nuncupatos", i.e. "named thus on account of their savage customs".
These words are echoed by Ermold the Black in the 9th century:
"Francus habet nomen de feritate sua", i.e. "The Frank is named for his ferocity".
Another possibility is a cognate with the Norse word for the Vikings that went into Russia, the Varangians, "Væringjar", from "vár" which means "pledge".
The notion that the name of the Franks was derived from the name of a weapon, like the name "Saxon" may be derived from the weapon "sax" or "seax" is not probable. For one thing, the "Saxon" is formed by a lengthening of "sax", whereas the opposite is true for "Frank" and "Francisca". The doubleheaded axe, the Francisca, is first attested in Latin texts in Spain, before this name was used in Gaul. As for the throwing lance or javelin, known in Anglo-Saxon as the "Franca" and in Norse as the "Frakka", again, the etymology of the weapon is clearly derived from the "Franks" themselves, and not the other way round. In Anglo-Saxon and other old Germanic languages, the "-a" at the end of "Franca" or "Frakka" denotes Genitive, Plural. Hence, the word literally means "...of the Franks", i.e. a Frankish-made javelin.
I believe the editors should update the article to reflect some of the information cited here. Thank you.
Jacob Davidson

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Franks" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.68.95.65 (talk) 18:49, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please move the name discussion from the "Rome to revolution" section to the "Origin of name" section and make it consistent. Fig (talk) 13:39, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too damn many pictures

Again several users found interesting to add lots of pictures to this page. We agreed it wasn't a touristic brochure and I'm not certain many of these have any use here but showing how beautiful our country is. I agree it's a lovely place but here it's just not the place to show this. I'm making a list here of pictures that I believe serve no purpose but showing a beautiful picture in itself. If people agree they should be removed Matthieu (talk) 15:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC).[reply]

  • The Calanques and the Lavander fields of Provence in the Geography section serve very little purpose. Not to mention they are both of fairly similar places, at least one is totaly useless here. These show landscapes but are largely irrelevant to the overall geography of France. Someone seeing these pictures wouldn't be more aware of France's geography or climate or whatever. A topologic map of France could be much more relevant.
  • Thats not a picture but Thomas Jefferson's quote is irrelevant to the history section, it has a close to 0 informative value. In what way his quote affected France or others' history?
  • In the economy section two pictures serve the same purpose, the A380 and the European Union flag both examplify the fact the French economy is integrated to Europe. Which is a fair and informative point but one picture is enough. I suggest to removed the European flag one as the A380 is more relevant to the French integration into Europe's industry and economy than the European flag.
  • The picture of Notre-Dame in the religion section serves no purpose. We already know, through the graphic above, that France is mostly catholic. The only reason that picture of Notre Dame is here is to show another landmark of France.
  • The picture of Claude-Monet is useful in that it's important to have the picture of someone that is important to the French culture. However I am not certain Monet is the most relevant example.
  • In the litterature there are two pictures, one of Moliere and one of Baudelaire. One is already enough, two is too much. I would advise removing Baudelaire's.

France is not a NATO member since De Gaulle

It is written in the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_NATO#Member_states "France withdrew from the integrated military command in 1966 to pursue an independent defence system. However, there were plans for it to rejoin sometime in 2008, but hadn't joined until now". This should be mentioned, shouldn't it? --Schwarzschachtel (talk) 06:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is not accurate and is a common misconception, France never left NATO, only the integrated military command. France has always been a member of the alliance as a political entity. Beside which, from a military point of view, France has participated in many NATO operations such as in Kosovo and Afghanistan and the French military operate with a lot of NATO standards and procedures. In practice, that meant that the French military was operating within NATO on a case by case basis after negotiations at the political level of the alliance and that French soldiers involved in NATO operations stay under French command at all time. The plans are to rejoin the integrated military command which it left in 1966, but it never left the alliance. Blastwizard (talk) 07:43, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, France never left the NATO alliance BritishWatcher (talk) 09:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This "symbol", cannot be seriously considered as the symbol of France

The only official symbol of French Republic is his flag... (Constitution de 1958) The other symbol (looking like coat of arms) have no real legal status. It is just in use for rare specific circumstances (like passport) when French authories have no other solutions than using it, because all other countries have similar stuffs... So, as a frenchman and teatcher of history, it is really strange seeing Wikipedia could considerate that as "symbol of France" !!!... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.2.101.42 (talk) 02:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

this symbol is used at the cover of passport and french diplomacy were using it since 1912, so we can considr it as a symbol of France. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.9.158.249 (talk • contribs) 01:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name of France

Can I ask how "Francia" "literally" "means" "Land of the Franks"? "Land of the franks" would in fact be "terra Francorum". Translating literally, Francia can only be transliterated, since the land known as Francia covered areas much larger than modern france. I don't know where "Frankland" has come from since this is an invented word. --86.146.215.169 (talk) 15:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The french emblem must be changed !

Hello !

I noticed that both french and english Wikipedia had recently changed the french emblem (instead of this emblem : http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Armoiries_r%C3%A9publique_fran%C3%A7aise.svg ) by the Marianne Emblem : http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Logo_de_la_R%C3%A9publique_fran%C3%A7aise.svg

According to the French Constitution, the emblems of France are : The marseillaise, Marianne and the french flag.

Please restore the marianne logo. I don't understand why did you remove it.

Thank you ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raphaelfargeon (talk • contribs) 11:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: Science and technology

Somebody needs to write something about France's achievements in the fields of science and technology and perhaps how they compare to other nations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.193.119.65 (talk) 02:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scientology and so on are not considered as CULTS, but as SECTS !!!!!!!!!!!

On the page, you can read

"France is a secular country as freedom of religion is a constitutional right, although some religious organisations such as Scientology, Children of God, the Unification Church, and the Order of the Solar Temple are considered CULTS.[42]"

Read the link [42], all those movements are considered as SECTS, please change.

France was Victorious in ww1 & 2??????

Someone please explain that one to me. I thought France was lost in ww2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.20.104.45 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For a while it was, but they found it again. FFMG (talk) 17:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's a nice one, FFMG. and to the other contributor, France lost in 1940, but the war was not over and Free French continued to fight. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.9.158.249 (talk) 17:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You can not capitulate and also be victorious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.132.119.8 (talk) 19:06, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ as of 2007 http://www.umsl.edu/services/govdocs/wofact2004/rankorder/2001rank.html
  2. ^ https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:France&oldid=285380969"