Talk:Nicolas Sarkozy: Difference between revisions
Colin marks (talk | contribs) Sarkozy - Jewish or not? |
|||
Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
::::Are you joking? I am disrupting the encyclopedia? This is the discussion page. And this is not disruptive in the least. It goes without saying that a Jew does not convert to Christianity without renouncing his Jewish heritage. Sarkozy's grandfather was born of a Jewish mother was he not? Therefore he is Jewish according to Orthodox and reformist rabbis.[[User:Pistolpierre|Pistolpierre]] ([[User talk:Pistolpierre|talk]]) 20:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC) |
::::Are you joking? I am disrupting the encyclopedia? This is the discussion page. And this is not disruptive in the least. It goes without saying that a Jew does not convert to Christianity without renouncing his Jewish heritage. Sarkozy's grandfather was born of a Jewish mother was he not? Therefore he is Jewish according to Orthodox and reformist rabbis.[[User:Pistolpierre|Pistolpierre]] ([[User talk:Pistolpierre|talk]]) 20:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC) |
||
:::::Well, Jesus Christ didn't renounce his Jewish heritage. [[Special:Contributions/86.136.61.102|86.136.61.102]] ([[User talk:86.136.61.102|talk]]) 00:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::::What's Sarkozy's grandfather has to do here ??? One last time, this talk page is only for making the article better, not for chatting about the religion of the cousin of the sister of the housekeeper of Sarkozy or of my grand grand dad.. Sarkozy is not Jew, end of the story, thanks very much--[[User:Bombastus|Bombastus]] ([[User talk:Bombastus|talk]]) 20:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC) |
:::::What's Sarkozy's grandfather has to do here ??? One last time, this talk page is only for making the article better, not for chatting about the religion of the cousin of the sister of the housekeeper of Sarkozy or of my grand grand dad.. Sarkozy is not Jew, end of the story, thanks very much--[[User:Bombastus|Bombastus]] ([[User talk:Bombastus|talk]]) 20:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:16, 29 April 2009
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nicolas Sarkozy 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, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 60 days ![]() |
![]() | Nicolas Sarkozy is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | France B‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
|
![]() | Biography: Politics and Government B‑class | |||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Protection ?
I believe this article should be semi-protected.
I mean, if I could get away with it, I would gladly vandalize this page... And I don't think I'm the only one.
XTBoris say something ! 19:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Are you serious? This article has only had 4 edits in the last 5 days. Joshdboz (talk) 22:22, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Sarkozy - Jewish or not?
I have read this discussion page over and over and again, and I'm still not clear whether Nicolas Sarkozy is or is not Jewish. If his mother is/was Jewish, then he is. (And I've seen it reported that she came from a Jewish family.) If she is/was not Jewish, then he is not. Simple as that! Nothing to do with nationality, ethnicity, politics or anything else.Colin marks (talk) 10:10, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Andrée Mallah
The text is wrong about Sarko's mother. She is not Greek and she is not a Jewish. That she had ancestors who were Greek or Jewish is not the question here. I cite the text from the article: “Adèle Bouvier, Nicolas Sarkozy's grandmother, was a Catholic like the majority of French people. Mallah, for whom religion had reportedly never been a central issue, converted to Catholicism upon marrying Adèle Bouvier”. It shows that 1) she is French as both of her parents were French 2) she was not a jewish as her parents were catholic and AFAIK she has never converted to judaism. She is French and she is Catholic. Telling that she is Greek-Jewish is a best a mistake. Additionally i find threats from Lam3l in the comment perfectly unacceptable. Would you continue such threats i would unfortunately be forced to take actions to make you become more respectful of other contributors. Med (talk) 15:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Obviously she is not Greek-Jewish so that citation should not be accepted. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 16:51, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
I have added two more sources to prove the point. Whats been said is that she is not Jewish in present time, but that she has got Jewish roots,and this you can't deny.And no, no one has categorised him as a Jew(like you claim), but only mentioned his mothers partly Jewish descent, so that you can't come in comments to anyone.
What i also don't get is why do you try to deny her Jewish backround when in the body of the article this is being mentioned?
- This kind of racist reasoning has been discussed at length here. Read the archives. Med (talk) 19:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Med, Benedict Mallah was an important figure in Sarkozy's life, possibly more so than his own father so it is hardly racist to point that out and the influence his grandfather may have had on him. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Try to explain me exactly whats racist here because i honestly don't understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.230.109.184 (talk) 20:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- It is not racist in the least to say that Sarkozy's grandfather was Jewish before marrying a French Roman Catholic widow of WWI. It is also ridiculous to call Sarkozy's grandfather French since he was an immigrant. Unless you are referring to his nationality which is completely separate from his ethnicity. It appears that people want to deny that French or Jewish ethnicity exists.Pistolpierre (talk) 17:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- When I hear "It is also ridiculous to call Sarkozy's grandfather French", I think of nationality, not "ethnicity".
- "Ethnicity" is a difficult to define notion, that many specialists regard to be inherently flawed. In any case, neither "French ethnicity" not "Jewish ethnicity" make any sense. Rama (talk) 18:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- It is not racist in the least to say that Sarkozy's grandfather was Jewish before marrying a French Roman Catholic widow of WWI. It is also ridiculous to call Sarkozy's grandfather French since he was an immigrant. Unless you are referring to his nationality which is completely separate from his ethnicity. It appears that people want to deny that French or Jewish ethnicity exists.Pistolpierre (talk) 17:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that Sarkozy's grandfather was a French national and that obviously religion meant nothing to him considering he renounced his Judaism. It is ridiculous to call Sarkozy's mother Jewish, however she is still ethnically Jewish. "French and Jewish ethnicity" made perfect sense to Napoleon considering he never considered himself to be ethnically French and he appealed to every ethnic group in Europe to overthrow their Germanic kings. Ethnicity made sense to the Hebrews according to the Jews who wrote the Pentateuch. It also makes sense to the French who are proud to be Celtic descendants of the Gauls as opposed to the foreign Latins, Romans, and Franks. Ethnicity is not difficult to define. Irish people spoke Gaelic. The Spanish, Portugese, Austrians, Swiss, French, Britons, Scots, Welsh all spoke Celtic languages before the Romans and Germanics conquered them. When you say ethnicity doesn't exist you sound exactly like St. Paul who said "there is no longer Greek or Jew, male or female."Pistolpierre (talk) 18:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- Where did you see he "renounced his judaism"? He isn't even a Jew by birth.. Please stop disrupting the encyclopedia for reasons I won't qualify. --Bombastus (talk) 19:36, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- Are you joking? I am disrupting the encyclopedia? This is the discussion page. And this is not disruptive in the least. It goes without saying that a Jew does not convert to Christianity without renouncing his Jewish heritage. Sarkozy's grandfather was born of a Jewish mother was he not? Therefore he is Jewish according to Orthodox and reformist rabbis.Pistolpierre (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, Jesus Christ didn't renounce his Jewish heritage. 86.136.61.102 (talk) 00:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
- What's Sarkozy's grandfather has to do here ??? One last time, this talk page is only for making the article better, not for chatting about the religion of the cousin of the sister of the housekeeper of Sarkozy or of my grand grand dad.. Sarkozy is not Jew, end of the story, thanks very much--Bombastus (talk) 20:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- ???This discussion is about denying Sarkozy's mother Sephardic Jewish heritage. I never said Sarkozy is a Jew. There is nobody on the planet that thinks he is a religious Jew. His Grandfather was a Jewish convert to Roman Catholicism. His mother was half-French by ethnicity and completely French by nationality.Pistolpierre (talk) 20:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- There's no such thing as "French ethnicity". The notion that a brown-hair, brown-eyed, cassoulet-eating Southerner living in a flat-roofed house be the same "ethnicity" as a blond-haired, blue-eyed, sausage-eating Alsacian living in a pointed roofed house, speaking French with a different accent and occasionally resorting to a different language altogether, is perfectly ridiculous. Rama (talk) 21:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- This entire conversation is pointless. His mother is not Jewish, but his mother's father was born into the Jewish faith. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- Tell that to my Grandma who is from Corrèze and she will tell you that Alsatians are Germans as opposed to the Celts of Brittany, the Massif Central, and the Sud-ouest. Same goes for the Burgundians and the Normans. The Gauls were the native French. The Franks were a confederation of Germanic tribes with their own language and culture. They didn't speak a Celtic language. By your bizarre logic, there is no difference between a native and a foreign culture. So apparently because the Romans conquered the Gauls, the Celtic ethnicity vanished from France? Tell that to the people in Brittany or Corrèze. They will laugh in your face. Or better yet go to Dublin and tell the Irish that because the Germanic English, Danes, Normans conquered their country, their Celtic ethnicity no longer exists. Are you denying that Sarkozy's grandfather hid in Corrèze because the French were rounding up Jews? French ethnicity existed for his grandfather obviously. Finally, I don't understand your point about eye color and hair color since both my parents have brown hair and brown eyes yet two of my sisters are blonde and one has blue eyes. There are Arabs and Jews and Africans with blue-eyes. Are you not aware that France was Celtic for five thousand years prior to the Roman and Frankish empires? Pistolpierre (talk) 21:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- You obviously mix up religion, nationality and "ethnicity". Alsatians are descendants of the Franks, like most modern Frenchmen, modulo various degrees of mixtures with other peoples over the ages. That's not the same as "being German". There are Germans who are "ethnically" Slavic (assuming that the term has any precise meaning).
- The problem with your notion is that you are constructing a notion of "ethnicity" which is, in essence, in resurection of the notion of human race. And like racists, you find yourself lost in matters of defining the boundaries of your "races".
- Your "There are Arabs and Jews and Africans with blue-eyes" is marvelous in this respect: you're mixing up an ethnical/cultural group, a religion, and a place (The reasons why these people have blue eyes is because they are descendants of Germanic people. People don't suddenly start having blue eyes out of the blue).
- And like all racists, you also have difficulties in telling at which degree of interbreeding people start not being this and become that. Because the premises of this worldview are unsound. Rama (talk) 21:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- So you are calling me a racist for saying that the original French were Gauls and they were Celtic? This is taught in French public schools and not even remotely controversial. Where on earth did you get the idea that a person must be German to have blue eyes? Why are you so confused? Arabs, Jews, Celts, Berbers, Ethiopians, Moors, Zulus, Asians, Turks, Slavs, Danes, Swedes, Cubans, Mexicans, etc. can all have blue eyes. Brown eyes are dominant. The gene for blue eyes is recessive and absolutely "comes out of nowhere". Alsace and Lorraine were part of Germany until 1664. The Franks were Germans. The "French" are Celts, Germans, Latins, North Africans, and Jews. The native people of France were Celts. Just like Naples and Sicily were originally Greek. Perhaps you are a racist since you deny people their cultural heritage. Your logic is severely flawed. You would have me believe that the Native-Americans are not an ethnicity because the "Americans" were Anglo-Saxons and Dutch immigrants from England. When I compare the Gauls to the native-Americans you say I am a racist. WOW. That is absurd.Pistolpierre (talk) 23:47, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- There's no such thing as "French ethnicity". The notion that a brown-hair, brown-eyed, cassoulet-eating Southerner living in a flat-roofed house be the same "ethnicity" as a blond-haired, blue-eyed, sausage-eating Alsacian living in a pointed roofed house, speaking French with a different accent and occasionally resorting to a different language altogether, is perfectly ridiculous. Rama (talk) 21:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- ???This discussion is about denying Sarkozy's mother Sephardic Jewish heritage. I never said Sarkozy is a Jew. There is nobody on the planet that thinks he is a religious Jew. His Grandfather was a Jewish convert to Roman Catholicism. His mother was half-French by ethnicity and completely French by nationality.Pistolpierre (talk) 20:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- I am not calling you a racist, I merely say that you are picturing a racist (and also arbitrary and inconsistant) notion of "ethnicity".
- 1) The notion that "The ancestors of the French are Gauls" is a ridiculous statements that I would have believed to confined to books dating back to the 3rd Republic. "The native people of France were Celts" ? you mean what, they like grew out from the ground ? the Celts invaded France at some point, just like all other people. Considering them to be the "true native French" is completely arbitrary (we're talking of the mainland, I assume ? Because Martinique is also France, and it wasn't Celtic).
- 2) I never said that one must be German to have blue eyes. It so happens that the North African people with blue eyes are descendants of Goths.
- 3) "Celts, Germans, Latins, North Africans, and Jews" is a non-sensical list. It makes as much sense as "Saxons, Soviet, Greek, Polynesian and buddhist": a people, a nationality, a civilisation, a geographical area and a religion. Some of these elements can be stretched as to compare to the others, but the whole list makes no sense.
- 4) "Native-Americans" are certainly not an ethnicity. There were many different. This illustrates how you're calling a bunch of things an "ethnicity" when they mix up in your mind, while they have no objective common nature: you could as well speak of an "euroasian ethnicity". Another indice of the arbitrary nature of your groups.
- Also I'd like you to stop putting things in my mouth ("When I compare the Gauls to the native-Americans you say I am a racist" -- well no. I never said such a thing). And I'd love you to stop rambling about off-topic subjetcs which have no place here. Rama (talk) 23:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- You are either lying or severely confused. Native-Americans are not an ethnicity? That is like saying Germans are not an ethnicity. It goes without saying that there were many different tribes. The Norse, Danes, Swedes, Goths, Franks, Saxons, Angles, Jutes, Frisians, Burgundians, Suevii, etc. were all Germans. For starters, this discussion has been about denying Sarkozy's mother and therefore Sarkozy himself Jewish heritage. The La Tène civilization of the Massif Central and the Halstatt civilization of Austria and Switzerland were both Celtic. This is a fact that anybody that knows anything about anthropology will tell you. The Celts were the native people of France. It is curious that you focus on North Africa as a region when the obvious point I was making was regarding eye color not being unique to Germany. People with blue eyes in Algeria, Morocco, Libya, Tunis, Egypt are descendants of Goths! LOL. You can have blue eyes if both your parents are Chinese or Hindu or Ethiopian! Also why do you say that the Greeks were a civilization and not an ethnicity? Are you going to continue to deny that the Celts are a distinct ethnicity? I find it extremely ironic that you accuse me of having a racist conception of ehtnicity yet you seem to believe that only descendants of the Goths in North Africa have blue eyes. That sounds like Aryan philosophy. For the last time, if French ethnicity doesn't exist, why did the people of Corrèze hide Sarkozy's grandfather from the "French"? Why do the Irish not consider the English to be Irish? Why do the Native-Americans not consider themselves to be English? In a billion years the rules of logic will not allow you to deny Sarkozy Jewish heritage from his grandfather.Pistolpierre (talk) 00:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Again, you are confusing "ethnicity", nationality, and religion.
- Germans are of course not an ethnicity. It is a nationality. Your regrouping "Norse, Danes, Swedes, Goths, Franks, Saxons, Angles, Jutes, Frisians, Burgundians, Suevii, etc. were all Germans" is arbitrary and based of the boundaries of modern Germany, which for long did not exist as such.
- And Sarkozy has no "Jewish heritage", since he is not of Jewish faith. His "ethical" links to the ancient Hebrew are to tenuous as to be negligible, if any. You could as well say that Sarkozy is of African heritage because his ancestors of 500'000 years ago came from there. Rama (talk) 00:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- What was the Roman name for the territory of Northern, Central, and parts of Eastern Europe directly to the east of Gaul and to the north of Italy? GERMANIA. Like Hispania and Brittania. They said the "Germans" were all from the same father. Also, Julius Caesar wrote a book about the Gauls so you have problem tracing French history to the Third Republic. Your logic is getting more and more absurd. If my grandmother is French, I have French heritage. This discussion has become tiresome. I'm now questioning your sanity.Pistolpierre (talk) 00:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Why should the Roman era be considered to be the reference point ? You are drawing a map of ancient peoples' migrations based on the boundaries of modern nation-States.
- I would also be grateful if you could remain civil. Rama (talk) 00:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- You are the only person on Earth that would call the Roman Empire a modern nation-state. Lets start at 1864 when the Prussians conquered Denmark and Austria and then dozens of German states. What is your point? From either point in time you are hell bent on saying that Bavarians, Rhinelanders, Hanoverians, Silesians, Saxons, etc. are not Germans. Your logic is irrational. I don't mean to be rude. There is no way this discussion can continue if you cannot understand that the Celts, Germans, Britons, Gauls, and Spanish are native to Ireland, Germania, Brittania, Gaul, and Hispania. Do you deny that the Anatolians were native to Turkey? Or that the Mesopatamians were native to Mesopatamia? If the answer is no, why would you deny that the Celts were native to the La Tène and Halstatt civilizations? Do you deny that the Mayans were native to the Mayan civilization? The Indians, Persians, Chinese, etc.?Pistolpierre (talk) 00:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Native Americans are no more an ethnicity than European. I disagree with Rama that there is no such thing as Jewish ethnicity but I really do not see what you are claiming is being hidden Pistol as the article fully documents Sarkozy's Jewish ancestry? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 01:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I contest the notion of "Jewish ethnicity" because it is strongly connotated in France (perhaps less so in other parts of the of world but this is a French topic); because is makes it ambiguous whether one is referring to the ancient Hebrew or to something else; and if referring to something posterior to the diaspora, it is effectively non-sensical.
- Pistolpierre, taking a modern nation-State (like France), setting back an arbitrary date 2000 years ago, and stating that the dominant group occupying, at that time, the territory later to be occupied by the modern nation-State, is the "native French", is absurd. Rama (talk) 01:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Then why do the Palestinians claim to be the natives of Israel? Is Israel not a modern state? The age of a modern nation has nothing to do with the cultural heritage of that nation. To argue that the previous cultural heritage does not shape the modern is non-sensical. If that were not the case then there would be no reason for the modern Israelis to deny the Palestinians a right of return to Israel. They are clinging to an arbitrary date 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000 years ago are they not? In the case of France, the Merovingians, Carolingians, Normans all appealed to the ethnicity of the Celts and Franks. It was the Franks ability to respect the Celts of Occitan that ensured their rule in the Sud-Ouest and Languedoc. Pope Urban II, a Norman, appealed to the Franks, not the Celts, to conquer Jerusalem. The Normans were a tiny minority of the Crusaders. The Pentateuch says the Canaanites and Jebusites were the native people of Israel and Jerusalem. Lastly, you say that modern France denies the history of the Gauls? Not according to Bonaparte who used it to appeal to the pride of the village idiots that filled the ranks of his Grande Armée. And Bonaparte himself did not consider himself to be French. You can blame Bonaparte for modern racism.Pistolpierre (talk) 01:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- You are again picturing this racist viison in which some "ethnies" (?) naturally settle down, forming modern nation-States. Sorry but it is not so. If anything can be identified to ethnies and retain a meaning, then these things are not neatly arranged on the borders of modern States.
- Also you seem to be obsessed by the notion that "ethnies" determine politico-historical dynamics. Maybe you've read Huntington and taken that seriously, I don't know, but the mess in the Middle East is due to individuals suffering, not to neatly defined groups of people deciding that they have a grudge against each other and casting their sentiments on indiduals top-down.
- I don't know which sort of bizarre notion you have regarding Napoleon, but for the record, Napoleon is not a modern and serious historian. Rama (talk) 07:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- For starters, Bonaparte gave Jews full civil rights in Europe. He is the father of modern France. He also loathed the French, English, Spanish, and Prussians. He was a racist. You keep saying that ethnicity does not exist, yet the refusal to grant right of return to the Palestinians back to Israel and the fact that Judaism does not proselytize is de facto proof of ethnicity. If everybody is Jewish as you claim, since Jewish ethnicity doesn't exist, then surely the Orthodox rabbis will do away with matrilineal descent. You are aware, aren't you, that your logic calls for the complete destruction of the Orthodox Jewish faith and the religious state of Israel? Did the French and English cultures or the cultures of Egypt, Israel, Persia, India, China shape the laws and political institutions of the United States? Do the Irish consider the English to be a separate ethnicity? Are you saying that the Arabs and the Jews are the same ethnicity? Your logic says everybody is Chinese, Jewish, Irish, English, Berber, Ethiopian. Do you deny that nations have unique cultural heritages? Is your name Borat? Do you loathe Kazakhstan, France, Britain, and America? Your ideas on ethnicity and modern nations are utopian at best and insane at worst.Pistolpierre (talk) 18:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Stop insulting me and distorting my point beyond recognition. Of course people who live at the other side of the world have little influence on a country; that's because they are far away, not because they are "ethnically" different.
- Native Americans are no more an ethnicity than European. I disagree with Rama that there is no such thing as Jewish ethnicity but I really do not see what you are claiming is being hidden Pistol as the article fully documents Sarkozy's Jewish ancestry? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 01:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- You are either lying or severely confused. Native-Americans are not an ethnicity? That is like saying Germans are not an ethnicity. It goes without saying that there were many different tribes. The Norse, Danes, Swedes, Goths, Franks, Saxons, Angles, Jutes, Frisians, Burgundians, Suevii, etc. were all Germans. For starters, this discussion has been about denying Sarkozy's mother and therefore Sarkozy himself Jewish heritage. The La Tène civilization of the Massif Central and the Halstatt civilization of Austria and Switzerland were both Celtic. This is a fact that anybody that knows anything about anthropology will tell you. The Celts were the native people of France. It is curious that you focus on North Africa as a region when the obvious point I was making was regarding eye color not being unique to Germany. People with blue eyes in Algeria, Morocco, Libya, Tunis, Egypt are descendants of Goths! LOL. You can have blue eyes if both your parents are Chinese or Hindu or Ethiopian! Also why do you say that the Greeks were a civilization and not an ethnicity? Are you going to continue to deny that the Celts are a distinct ethnicity? I find it extremely ironic that you accuse me of having a racist conception of ehtnicity yet you seem to believe that only descendants of the Goths in North Africa have blue eyes. That sounds like Aryan philosophy. For the last time, if French ethnicity doesn't exist, why did the people of Corrèze hide Sarkozy's grandfather from the "French"? Why do the Irish not consider the English to be Irish? Why do the Native-Americans not consider themselves to be English? In a billion years the rules of logic will not allow you to deny Sarkozy Jewish heritage from his grandfather.Pistolpierre (talk) 00:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- You once again display your incapability to distinguish between so-called "ethnicities", religions and nationalities. Orthodox Jewish faith is a religion. Israel is a State. Hebrew were an "ethnicity" some 2000 years ago. And the fact that some people hold racist views does not make the concept of race a sound one.
- Furthermore, this is a talk page about Nicolas Sarkozy, not about your 19th Century view of the world. Rama (talk) 19:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- This is a discussion about denying Sarkozy's Mother Jewish ethnicity. Your logic says there is no such thing as Jewish ethnicity. Therefore we are all Jewish. Therefore there is no need for a Jewish state because Jews can practice Judaism anywhere on Earth. Is that not the natural progression of your logic? Why do you use the term Hebrew? Are you saying that Arabs are Hebrews? Are you saying that I should call Jews Hebrews? Your admission that the French and English shaped U.S. political institutions is admission that there is such a thing as a unique cultural heritage. I didn't say anything about ethnicity. Although given the zealotry that the Abrahamic religions inspired in the West, it is doubtful that since democracy never emerged in the Middle East prior to 1948, it ever would have if not for the disastrous consequences the religious cultures of the Middle East have had on the West. That is not remotely racist, it is simply historical fact. Pistolpierre (talk) 19:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I completely support Med point of view on the initial issue, now if some others people could stop pushing their weird agenda we could maybe move on... Sensi.fr (talk) 05:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Carla Bruni
In December 2007, newspaper reports indicated that he is presently involved with Carla Bruni, an Italian heiress who is a songwriter, singer and former supermodel
- I would remove that sentence, it's only gossip because neither Sarkozy nor Bruni have confirmed that they are in a relationship and it's not like there's a picture of them huging and kissing, they only went to disneyland!. Per WP:LIVING we shouldn't encourage this kind of stuff. Opinions?-Yamanbaiia (talk) 17:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree-: Furthermore, who Sarkozy is shagging is not automatically encyclopedic, however carefully staged the thing is. Rama (talk) 17:16, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, L'Express editor in chief has indicated Monday that Carla Bruni, who is a friend, has confirmed the fact to him. This is not gossip, having been validated by one of the involved parties reference here. Hektor (talk) 07:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- It hasn't been validated. In that article the editor of L'Express says that Carla Bruni confirmed to him (because they are "friends") that she has had with Sarkozy a liaison, but that's like a she said to a friend of a friend thing, plus liaison doesn't really mean that they are more than friends. The editor could be saying that just to sell more papers, and Bruni could be saying it to bump up her career. The fact is that the Elysée says "Pas de commentaire", so until there's a more tangible confirmation of this, we should keep it out. -Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 14:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- And it's pure coincidence, of course, that the mother of Carla Bruni was part of the French delegation with the president to the Vatican yesterday ? Hektor (talk) 08:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, not a coincidence. He probably invited her. -Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 16:16, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- What was wrong with the one line report referencing The Daily Telegraph and linking to the online article. It is most definitely a reliable source as far as I'm concerned, there are multiple sources for this, I just chose the best one.--Alf melmac 14:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- I live in France and i have not heard of this. But if Bruni's mother did in fact insinuated that they might get married then it should be in the article. Show me some refs and i'll rewrite it for ya if you want.--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 14:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- In this diff I amended the one-liner to read "Sarkozy is reported to have asked the Italian model turned pop singer Carla Bruni to marry him" - giving this url for the article, which included the paragraph "The newspaper claimed that sources other than Miss Bruni Tedeschi, a former concert pianist, confirmed that Mr Sarkozy, 52, who only met Miss Bruni last month, had popped the question and told her to give him an answer by New Year's Day" hence why I couched the terminology to "..is reported" which is factually correct, readers should decide themselves on the validity of the information, as with all sources, but being written up in The Telegraph (albeit with a slightly affected headline) is sufficent for that line to stand. I have no view whatsoever on the merits of the preceding paragraph that was removed.--Alf melmac 15:02, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- A specific search using Google News with ""Carla Bruni"+"Nicolas Sarkozy" ask marry" elicits eight newspapers running stories (excluding duplicates).--Alf melmac 15:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- A google search ( "Carla Bruni"+"Nicolas Sarkozy" mariage ) in French results only in blogs and gossip (by the way this image is hilarious). Until this is confirmed by either parties, or by a very reliable source like Le Monde, CNN, BBC, etc; it's just gossip. He has been linked with a lot of other women since he's been single (Rachida Dati, Laurence Ferrari) and none of it was true. This was discussed thoroughly in the WikiFrench Talk page for Sarkosy's article, and most of the users agreed that listing every name that pops up every couple of weeks was ridiculous, and that only facts were to be listed. Facts here are: Sarkozy and Bruni went to disneyland, lots of pictures of them were taken, and that's it, the rest is just speculation and claims of "someone who's a friend of a friend of Bruni". Bruni got a bit more of international press than the others only because lots of pictures were taken, and it was probably a slow news week or something. Like someone said in the French discussion, Britannica would not list this kind of thing.--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 22:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- I live in France and i have not heard of this. But if Bruni's mother did in fact insinuated that they might get married then it should be in the article. Show me some refs and i'll rewrite it for ya if you want.--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 14:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- What was wrong with the one line report referencing The Daily Telegraph and linking to the online article. It is most definitely a reliable source as far as I'm concerned, there are multiple sources for this, I just chose the best one.--Alf melmac 14:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, not a coincidence. He probably invited her. -Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 16:16, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- And it's pure coincidence, of course, that the mother of Carla Bruni was part of the French delegation with the president to the Vatican yesterday ? Hektor (talk) 08:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- It hasn't been validated. In that article the editor of L'Express says that Carla Bruni confirmed to him (because they are "friends") that she has had with Sarkozy a liaison, but that's like a she said to a friend of a friend thing, plus liaison doesn't really mean that they are more than friends. The editor could be saying that just to sell more papers, and Bruni could be saying it to bump up her career. The fact is that the Elysée says "Pas de commentaire", so until there's a more tangible confirmation of this, we should keep it out. -Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 14:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, L'Express editor in chief has indicated Monday that Carla Bruni, who is a friend, has confirmed the fact to him. This is not gossip, having been validated by one of the involved parties reference here. Hektor (talk) 07:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree-: Furthermore, who Sarkozy is shagging is not automatically encyclopedic, however carefully staged the thing is. Rama (talk) 17:16, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Now in Luxor
- Sarkozy is now in XMas vacation in Luxor with Carla Bruni Image : Morticia and Gomez. They entered the Old Winter Palace hotel holding hands in front of tens of journalists. Still not worth mentioning ? Hektor (talk) 15:31, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Spelling issue
The spelling Sarköczy at the beginning of the main page is almost certainly wrong. It is just not consistent with Hungarian spelling. The proper spelling is almost certainly Sárközy (which spelling actually occurs later in the article, at the beginning of the Personal life/Family background section). My main objection is to the presence of c, not to the dropping of the accent mark from á (which might have happened when gallicizing the name -- see in the article in the Personal life/Family background section). I did not make any corrections, since I have no sources to rely on, it is only my fluency in Hungarian that makes me make these comments. Someone else with access to sources is welcome to make the change. Of course, I may be wrong here in that on the French birth certificate the Hungarian spelling might have been mangled. User: Mateat ( talk) Fri Dec 28 22:48 2007 (UTC)
- This was changed by 85.178.89.238 [1]; I've reverted it. Korg (talk) 18:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
African speech
Did he give the mentioned speech in French or English? I think that's worth mentioning as I wasn't able to put the following note into context: (note that the French word "paysans" can be translated as either "peasants" or as "rural people") . Is the article suggesting Sarkozy translated the word improperly and so used it improperly. Or is the article saying that Sarkozy said the French word paysans and he might have got translated improperly. -- JanCK (talk) 22:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm unsure of what language he gave the speech, but being francophone myself, paysans CAN be translated to "peasants" or "rural people" but in general it is used in the sense of "residents" or "citizens". Example: les paysans de la France would usually mean "the citizens of France".
- No bloody way ! In modern French, it definitely means "the peasants of France". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.224.138.28 (talk) 16:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Reigning Monarch?
I am by no means an expert on French domestic politics, but something tells me that Sarkozy should not be listed under category Reigning Monarchs. If somebody with admin status could rectify this I would be grateful. Thanks. 166.82.48.137 (talk) 05:32, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed, a republic does not have a monarch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.109.186.227 (talk) 05:44, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- He is co-prince of Andorra. Not king of the French, and this is how he is a reigning monarch. This mention is not some clever slight on the man, but is because of a historical and legal oddity, inherited from the Counts of Foix and later on the kings of France.CyrilleDunant (talk) 10:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Alumni of Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris??
Is Sarkozy an alumni of the Paris Institute of Political Studies? Apparently, he's not in the List of Sciences Po People article yet he is in the Category:Alumni of Sciences Po category.--Sli723 (talk) 05:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Military service
In his youth, there was a draft in France. How come Sarkozy did not serve in the French Military?
- He did. Rama (talk) 11:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Education
'He enrolled at the Université Paris X Nanterre, where he read law and graduated with a DEA degree in Business law.' - Actually he first graduated with a maîtrise in Private law, then got a DEA degree in Political science. You can check his official resume at the Elysee's web site, elysee.fr 81.65.1.92 (talk) 21:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)jp
- You are right indeed, thanks for the correction! -- lucasbfr talk 16:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Caricature
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ad/Touche-moi-pas.jpg/220px-Touche-moi-pas.jpg)
I have removed it from the article, I'm not sure it is suited here. Note that this is in relation to the "Casse-toi alors, pauvre con!" section. What do you think? -- lucasbfr talk 16:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- I think it should stay, it's very canard enchaîné. Merci, Erxnmedia (talk) 16:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Il you remove it , you've to do so for the picture about Karsher. That's the same idea, a reaction with humour and impertinence. So french. --86.197.55.12 (talk) 17:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
On the subject of "Casse-toi pauvre con" my understanding of the word 'con' is that it is far more offensive than dumb-ass, and about as offensive as the word 'cunt' in english. I would correct it but don't know enough about wikipedia etiquette, what do people think? (Jbonner01 (talk) 19:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC))
- Having spent a fair amount of time in France in the past (about a year and a half), I chose dumb-ass because of my understanding of the (constant) use of "con" in conversation (among highly educated computer scientists), along the lines of
- "Oh, qu'il est con"
- "Comme il est con ce type"
- "Fais pas le con"
- and so forth which usually mean "Boy is he dumb", "Do you see how dumb this guy is" and "Don't be stupid". You don't really get into "cunt" territory until you add a gender specific ending along the lines of
- "Connard!" (male asshole)
- "Connasse!" (female asshole)
- So if Sarkozy said "pauvr'connard!" I would have translated that as "stupid asshole" because the "-ard" ending adds some emphasis. "Con" alone is used with practically every other word in a typical spoken French sentence, and due to its frequency, has a softer tone.
I lived in France too and didn't hear it that often. And when i did it was usually around some other pretty nasty words. Then again, it's cognate in Spanish also means cunt and really isn't that bad when you say it (almost all hispanophones use it from Chile to Mexico to the Baleric Islands). Arthurian Legend (talk) 22:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, Erxnmedia (talk) 20:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I bow to your superior knowledge, thanks for helping me learn more about swearing in French! (I mean this in the nicest possible way). (Jbonner01 (talk) 20:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC))
I'm francophone myself, and con isn't nearly as bad as saying cunt, in my experience I'd compare it to "stupid" as even children use it to no consequence, and I've yet to find someone who thinks "con" is worse than a word such as "maudit" which translates directly to "damn".
- Hello, I'm french and while "con" can, depending on the context, be weak or even friendly ("mon con" having a meaning close to "my friend"), "pauvre con" really mean something as strong as "you cunt". generally "pauvre (whatever)" is very strong and never ironic. "con" litteraly mean "cunt" (slang for female genital) btw. I'd say the closest translation in this context would be "you sorry cunt". Oh, and just so you know that I'm only saying that for the sake of a correct translation, I did vote for N. Sarkozy and I still think he is a good president. I prefer not to make the modification on the main article myself though, as I don't know if I have the proper legitimacy to do that. 88.165.19.210 (talk) 22:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm French too. The original litteral meaning of "con" (="cunt") has been forgotten. Here "con" should be translated as "damn fool" ; "bloody idiot" ; or "schmuck", and not as "cunt". Thanks. MaCRoEco (talk) 22:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Pronunciation
I take it the pronunciation is meant to be the French one rather than an English one, as it uses French phonemes. I am therefore removing the stress mark, as French does not have this form of stress (see [(linguistics)]. — Paul G (talk) 14:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
The pronunciation audio file has currently been replaced by the sound of a fart. I cannot find when this was added and am therefore simply informing those who can better remedy this. 71.225.55.135 (talk) 00:15, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
- Fixed; thanks for spotting that! Korg (talk) 11:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Criticism on being drunk?
I was surprised to not see this in the article, while I do not know for sure if he was actually drunk at this press conference(after a meeting with Vladmir Putin) it is certainly contestable. Here's a youtube link to the press conference. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd44XTlUQjQ
He is the anti-Christ. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.147.237.7 (talk) 10:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Sarkozy and Ireland
President Sarkozy in Ireland and indeed in his own Country France is referred to as the Prince Of Darkness,the little general with the huge ego.He is unable to understand basic English,The Irish said no to Lisbon,however the New Napolene,fails to understand a simple No.His own people were refused a vote as he would have had to except the French rejection of Lisbon. President is big on pomp,but lacking in leadership regarding what is best for France. Since his election,his wonderful country is drifting,no leadership,no guidance,no help for farmers or workers,whilst France is going down the tubes ,he marrys a pop star,model,lectures Ireland as his personal plan for the big job has been stalled. Thank you Ireland,so far you have saved Europe,keep saying No,non,No—E —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.45.69.4 (talk) 12:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
- I have never heard this moniker used for Sarkozy and I am an Irish native do you have a source proving that is is a widely used term? Also this is the talk page of a politician, not your personal soapbox, so please leave the monologues about how another country voted in a referendum to a more relevant forum. 83.70.107.75 (talk) 17:18, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Alattyán
It says on the article on Alattyán that he is regarded by older inhabitants of the village as their "lord". Is this correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.107.204.84 (talk) 22:08, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Photo
The description of his photo is wrong! Neenoeeen 72.137.99.110 (talk) 15:44, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Editsemiprotected
The following (from the last paragraph of the Presidency section) is a mess. It has the French "et" where the English "and" is needed; it has poorly translated text, and numerous small grammatical errors:
On July 23, 2008, parliament votes the “loi de modernisation de l'économie” which liberate concurrence on prices on retailing et reduce limitations of creation of retail surfaces. The Government has also made great changes on working-time reglementations.
change to:
On July 23, 2008, Parliament voted the “loi de modernisation de l'économie” (Modernization of the Economy Law) which loosened restrictions on retail prices and reduced limitations on the creation of businesses. The Government has also made changes to long-standing French work-hour regulations, allowing employers to negotiate overtime with employees and making all hours worked past the traditional French 35-hour week tax-free.
All content changes came from the original source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neestle (talk • contribs)
- Thank you. MaCRoEco (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Note 82
Hi there,
Just to let you know that Note 82 seems wrong : it lead to an error page on what is anyway the wrong site (topchretiens instead of Lefigaro.fr). Hope it will be useful 20080910 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.239.18.195 (talk) 10:32, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you, I have replaced it with a link to the book references (I don't get why it was linking to topchretiens in the first place either). Merci! -- lucasbfr talk 13:00, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
What are his religious beliefs?
What exactly are his religious beliefs, if any? If you do comment, please indicate a reference. --AB (talk) 22:20, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Former Mossad agent?
Are the rumours that Sarkozy used to work for the Israelli intelligence agency true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.240.117.116 (talk) 22:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- No. This was an utterly false rumor sent to French police during the campaign, and the event was later reported by Le Figaro. Joshdboz (talk) 22:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Parents
The article states that his father married three times after the parents' divorce, but did the mother ever remarry? Did the father remain in contact with Nicolas and siblings? It states he rarely saw his father, but did the contact cease completely? Are both parents alive? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 16:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
libéral or liberal?
Is it necessary to describe him as libéral (rather than liberal) in the 'UMP leader' section of the article? The French definition of 'liberal' is the correct one and that which is used throughout the whole world with the exception of the USA. Just because the USA stupidly think that liberal means left-wing or socialist doesn't make it true. Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopaedia of knowledge and not a collection of articles dumbed-down for the average American to understand.--217.203.146.115 (talk) 21:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- Wikipedia former featured articles
- Old requests for peer review
- B-Class France articles
- High-importance France articles
- All WikiProject France pages
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- High-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles