Jump to content

Talk:French Revolution

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bebgsurg (talk | contribs) at 15:48, 20 July 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

First Paragraph Misleading - there was no resulting democracy for 50 percent of the population - this warrants to be in the introduction as part of the definition.

The Revolution overthrew the monarchy, established a *republic, catalyzed violent periods of political turmoil, and finally culminated in a dictatorship under Napoleon who brought many of its principles to areas he conquered in Western Europe and beyond.

  • [male controlled]

Republic- a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch. Women are people therefore this is not a republic by today's definition, it was not considered a republic by the women of that generation and likewise this was not democracy.

The French Republic did not allow 50 percent of its population to access any of that power. It is a common misconception or just misogynistic to think that the French Revolution resulted in true democracy - French women were not allowed the vote until 1946, long after Turkey.

2) Historians who do not consider the French Revolution as important would not mention it, so how do you grade this? Out of how many 'important' events? Who is on this panel of historians? Very subjective statement, France came long after Greece....and the Revolution was a half-attempt at the progress of human history. Western historians do not know the history of MOST OTHER human populations to any similar degree so I wonder how this statement came about, if it wasn't pure arrogance.

[??] Historians widely regard the Revolution as one of the most important events in human history.[2][3][4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88octopus88 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I scanned a dozen or so current university history textbooks at the AHA convention and every one in Western & World history devoted a lot of attention to French Rev--usually an entire chapter. Rjensen (talk) 07:09, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

French Revolution entry

there is a phrase in para 4 under Causes - the upper class was always insured a stable living - it would be better expressed as “the upper class was always assured a stable living” Robynpjenkins (talk) 04:08, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Robynpjenkins: I agree. But in any case, per WP:BOLD, you should just feel free to make such changes yourself. If anyone disagrees they will revert your change (and all such reverts should be understood as: "Hmm. I'm not sure about this. Can we talk it through on the talk page first?"). Only obviously controversial or large changes need routinely be discussed prior to making them. --Xover (talk) 12:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Impact - United States

Section 9.4 (Long Term Impact - United States) refers to the incumbent Jefferson administration of the United States in 1793 as "Republican", which is incorrect; the government was "Democratic-Republican", distinct from the Republican Party of Lincoln and of today, and more closely related to the Democratic party of Jackson and today. This should be changed to read "Democratic-Republican" or, if preferred, "Democratic" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.245.130.33 (talk) 18:07, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok. Jefferson and his supporters called it the "Republican Party" as do most historians. Modern political scientists call it the Dem-Rep party. Rjensen (talk) 02:51, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article make deeply contentious claims

I added an NPOV, because this article takes the freedom, without an appropriate back up of secondary sources, to express value judgment on the French revolution, which to all historians remains a deeply contentious issue. Hannah Arendt, of course, comes to mind (which the article does not even quote and seems not to be aware of) but hundreds more could be added. The Geopolitical order of Europe is not the result of the French Revolution, but the reaction to it, the Congress of Vienna. I express here my firm belief that the NPOV shall stay in place until serious, non-ideological scholarship, is used to back up what are otherwise rather vague and contentious claims.

@Aristotele1982: Which claims in this article are contentious, specifically? Jarble (talk) 21:52, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
yes, and which ones are "deeply" so? and most important, which RS does Aristotele1982 think are missing and should be included. Rjensen (talk) 21:57, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 June 2019

In the sentence beginning "Habermas argued that...", "17th century" should be hyphenated, per MOS:CENTURY. 82.98.7.185 (talk) 04:12, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done —KuyaBriBriTalk 13:52, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The fifth paragraph begins :

After the Thermidorian Reaction, an executive council ...


I think it should be

After the Jacobins and Robespierre were overthrown in the Thermidorian Reaction, an executive council ...

Bruce Bodner bebgsurg@tmlp.net

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:French_Revolution&oldid=907112972"