From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject France (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Countries (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for France:

Edit Request - Geography Section

"Metropolitan France extends from the Mediterranean Sea to the English Channel and the North Sea, and from the Rhine to the Atlantic Ocean; due to its shape, it is often referred to in French as l’Hexagone ("The Hexagon"). France is one of only three countries (with Morocco and Spain) to have both Atlantic and Mediterranean coastlines."

Portugal also has Atlantic and Mediterranean coastlines. The Algarve region has it's southern border with the Mediterranean while the whole country has it's western border with the Atlantic.

João Galamas (talk) 20:52, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Edit Request - Law section:

"France is tolerant of the LGBT community. Since 1999, civil unions for homosexual couples are permitted, and since May 2013, same-sex marriage and LGBT adoption are legal in France.[99]"

to be removed: LGBT adoption is Legal

Same sex marriage is legal in France since may 2013 but LGBT adoption is legal, it's actually the subject of larges debates ("manif pour tous" vs "Anti Manif pour tous").

Edit Request - Literature Section: "Jean de La Fontaine is one of the most famous fabulist of that time, as he wrote hundreds of fables, some being far more famous than others, such as The Ant and the Grasshopper."he is stupid and is awesome.

Upon reading the article on "The Ant and the Grasshopper" - Fontaine was _reinterpreting_ Aesop's Fables.

Edit request

Hi, in the fourth paragraph of the introduction, there is a link that states France has the fourth largest nominal military budget, but when you click on the link the article states it has the fifth largest budget. Could someone check please.


In the Prehistory section, it states:

"The oldest traces of human life in what is now France date from approximately 1,800,000 years ago."

Sorry, but humans have not been around than long. Wikipedia's own article on humans states they originated in Africa some 200,000 years ago, one 9th of the time stated in this article. The citation is 25 years old and is now obviously superceded.

Plus one: +1 : this is assertion in not only completely stupid but based on completelty outdated references. Please delete. (talk) 22:00, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Edit request In the economy section, it says "France derives 75% of its electricity from nuclear power, the highest percentage in the world.[138]". Can someone put a better source, the source given claims that France makes 39% of electricity from nuclear, in complete contradiction with the article. Maybe this one: Up to date and reliable. The real figure is 73%. Liberivore (talk) 16:14, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Edit request

The lead needs more than a single sentence on the history of France.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 18:13, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit request in the Religion section

The paragraph begins with: is the Roman Catholic cathedral where the kings of France were crowned until 1825.[235] ]]

This text should be below the picture instead of in the paragraph, please correct it. (talk) 12:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Spoken Wiki[edit]

Electronic music[edit]

there is also Laurent wolf that is a very popular electronic music producer


I am seriously disappointed by the fact that the language section only talks about French. Must I remind you that France is a linguistically diverse country.


Geographical distribution of regional languages and dialects. (Note that French is spoken all over the country, including both Metropolitan France and DOMs-TOMs (not shown on this map).)

The languages of Metropolitan France include:

There are also several languages spoken in France's overseas areas (see Administrative divisions of France for details)

French Sign Language is also recognised as a language of France.

There are immigrant languages spoken in some parts of France.


  1. ^ Mehdi Lallaoui, Kabyles du Pacifique, 1994, Éditions Au nom de la mémoire.


At the 1999 census, INSEE sampled 380,000 adult people all across Metropolitan France, and asked them questions about their family situation. One of the questions was about the languages that their parents spoke with them before the age of 5. This is the first time serious statistics were computed about the proportion of mother tongues in France. The results were published in Enquête familiale, Insee, 1999.

Here is a list of the nine most prominent mother tongues in France based on Enquête familiale.

Rank Language Mother tongue Percentage of adult population
1 French 39,360,000 86%
(note that this figure is an underestimate because people under 18 years of age were not surveyed; see note #2 below the table)
2 Germanic languages
(Alsatian, Lorraine Franconian, etc.)
(of whom Alsatian: 660,000;
standard German: 210,000;
Lorraine Franconian: 100,000)
(of whom Alsatian: 1.44%;
standard German: 0.46%;
Lorraine Franconian: 0.22%)
3 Arabic
(especially Maghrebi Arabic)
940,000 2.05%
4 Occitan language
(Languedocian, Gascon, Provençal, etc.)
(another 1,060,000 had some exposure)
(another 2.32% had some exposure, see notes)
5 Portuguese 580,000 1.27%
6 Oïl languages
(Picard, Gallo, Poitevin, Saintongeais, etc.)
(another 850,000 had some exposure)
(another 1.86% had some exposure, see notes)
7 Italian, Corsican and Ligurian (Niçard) 540,000 1.19%
8 Spanish 485,000 1.06%
9 Breton 280,000
(another 405,000 had some exposure)
(another 0.87% had some exposure, see notes)
10 About 400 other languages
(Polish, Berber languages, East Asian languages, Catalan, Franco-Provençal, Corsican, Basque, West Flemish, etc.)
as well as those who gave no response
(of whom English: 115,000)
(of whom English: 0.25% of total adult population)
Total 45,762,000
(46,680,000 including those with two mother tongues who were counted twice)
(2% of people have both French and another language as their mother tongue, thus, they are counted twice)

If we add up people with mother tongue and people with some exposure to the language before the age of 5 (see note #3 below), then the five most important languages in metropolitan France are (note that the percentages add up to more than 100, because many people are now counted twice):

  • French: 42,100,000 (92%)
  • Occitan: 1,670,000 (3.65%)
  • German and German dialects: 1,440,000 (3.15%)
  • Oïl languages (excl. French): 1,420,000 (3.10%)
  • Arabic: 1,170,000 (2.55%)

Notes on the table[edit]

  1. The data in the table are about mother tongues, and not about actual language practice. It states that 14% of the adult people living in France in 1999 were born and raised up to the age of 5 in families that spoke only (or predominantly) some other languages than French. It does not mean that 14% of adult people in France spoke some other languages than French in 1999.
  2. Only adults (i.e. 18 years and older) were surveyed. This means that French people born between 1981 and 1999 are not included in the survey. The mother tongue of the younger generations is more predominantly French than is the case with the older generations, because as the Enquête familiale survey explains, regional and immigrant language transmission decreases dramatically with each new generation, as French replaces the regional and immigrant languages. In the Enquête familiale survey, only 35% of parents whose mother tongue was a regional or immigrant language reported they spoke that language to their children. Thus, the 86% figure of people with French as their mother tongue is an underestimate because the younger generations whose predominant mother tongue is French are not counted.
  3. The concept of "mother tongue" may not give a complete idea of the phenomenon of minority languages in France. This is because there are many people who were born and raised in families in which parents spoke to them only (or predominantly) French, but in which some regional or immigration languages were also occasionally used. One example: while the data tell us that 610,000 adults in 1999 had one of the Occitan dialects as their mother tongue, the survey also found out that another 1,060,000 adults were born and raised in families in which one of the Occitan dialects was occasionally spoken. Some of these 1,060,000 people may speak Occitan as fluently as the 610,000 people who have it as a mother tongue, while some other (the majority, probably) have only a limited knowledge of Occitan. We cannot infer from this that 1,670,000 adults are speakers of Occitan, but it may be the case that the total number of people with some form of exposure to Occitan is higher than the 610,000 figure, though some of this number may have abandoned the language since then.

Edit request 3.7.2013 Population should be corrected[edit]

Estimated total population of France is 66 200 000 (1st January 2012). It should be noted that currently cited INSEE number does not include Mayotte or COM (collectivités d’outre-mer).


From page four: Le champ géographique du bilan démographique de 2011 reste la France métropolitaine et les DOM, mais sans Mayotte, dont la transformation en département d’outre-mer date du 31 mars 2011. En ajoutant les 803 000 habitants des collectivités d’outre-mer et de Mayotte, la population des territoires de la République française au 1 er janvier 2012 est estimée à 66,2 millions d’habitants.


I will start this discussion here wishing to gain visibility. There are many articles as Normandy and Brittany duplicated on Normandy (French region) and Brittany (administrative region), this made as much sense as having Massachusetts and Massachusetts (state). Vinukin (talk) 23:22, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

French regions had different status, by example Brittany was a Kingdom, a Duchy, a Province and a Region. It's similar to Massachusetts (state) having the Province of Massachusetts Bay article, but I think French regions articles could be reorganised. By example, "Brittany" should be transformed into a disambiguation article while its content should be transferred to an article called Province of Brittany; "Kingdom of Brittany", "Duchy of Brittany" and "Region of Brittany" could be kept this way. Blaue Max (talk) 07:41, 8 August 2015 (UTC)


Concerning this edit [1] by Vrac, please what are your sources to state that Napoleon "waged war" ? The National Convention did declared war on Austria in 1792, but Napoleon was not leading the French governement at this time, and later coalitions were gathered against France, not the other way around. Or when exactly did Napoleon asked Europe to form coalitions to overthrow his government? I would be glad to have informations about that... In fact, Napoleon probably declared war on Portugal and Russia only, all the other wars were defensive... That can't be termed as "waging war against much Europe". I support the removal of the controversial and historicaly inaccurate sentence added recently and support the reinstatement of the original sentence "[Napoleon] dominated European affairs and had a long-lasting impact on Western culture.", which is historicaly accurate and not controversial. Blaue Max (talk) 09:04, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Defensively or offensively, Napoleon waged war. A search for the phrase "Napoleon waged war" in Google yields an impressive list of results. Wikipedia is not breaking ground by using the phrase. Not to be outdone, Napoleon himself was fond of the expression in L'Art de la guerre. The proposed phrasing "Napoleon dominated European affairs" glosses over his undeniably bloody history. Vrac (talk) 12:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm not talking about Google hits. The phrase "Napoleon loved tits" probably gives an impressive list of results also... Have you reliable sources or a pertinent reasoning to support the current NPOV version which surreptitiously asserts that Napoleon was responsible of the wars? I could accept the sentence "who conquered much of Europe," which has the advantage to leave aside the responsibilities of the war, but not your historically inaccurate and controversial point of view. But was there even a single reason to change the long-standing original sentence??? Blaue Max (talk) 13:58, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
"Napoleon loved tits" gets no results at all. Regardless of motivation, Napoleon undeniably waged war. That the phrase assigns responsibility is your interpretation. "dominated European affairs" is not NPOV, it puts a white-washed spin on a sanguinary period of French history. I haven't looked to see who changed the wording but I agree with it. Vrac (talk) 14:24, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
War is bloody? Wow great news! But was it Napoleon's responsibility? Hmmm... the myth of the "Corsican Ogre" is outdated... Do you have any objection about the sentence "who conquered much of Europe", which is more neutral ? Blaue Max (talk) 14:38, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes war is bloody and should be described as such. I do object to "conquered much of Europe". "waged war" is already a rather delicate euphemism for conflicts that left millions dead. Vrac (talk) 17:01, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
"Wage war against much Europe" is not a euphemism, it is a historical inaccuracy. Seventh Coalitions were formed against France, not the other way around. You are unable to provide reliable source or pertinent arguments and you are unable to make compromise. Without reliable sources or arguments from you, I'll reinstate the original sentence. Blaue Max (talk) 18:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Another problem is that right now, the phrase implies that the wars began with Napoleon declared the First Empire, not true either. SuffrenXXI (talk) 19:06, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
I did provide sources, sources that attest that this phrase is commonly used in regards to Napoleon. His own propaganda used the phrase. I see this as a linguistic problem, you see this as "responsibility" (read blame) for the wars being assigned to Napoleon. That he waged war against much of Europe is a factual statement that is attested. Whether he did so offensively or defensively is a separate question. Vrac (talk) 19:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
You admitted yourself that you used this phrase to emphasize "Napoleon's bloody and sanguinary history"... That's not so factual... Plus it is misleading as SuffrenXXI has pointed out. Blaue Max (talk) 19:57, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Of course it was bloody, millions died. That is a fact which is independent of motive or blame, as I have been saying all along. Reread what I wrote and pay close attention. SuffrenXXI appears to be talking about when the wars started. Vrac (talk) 20:27, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
No, you clearly said several times that any other formulations than "Napoleon waged war against much Europe" is an attempt to diminish or white-wash "Napoleon's bloody history". There's no "Napoleon's bloody history", there was a bloody war, but it wasn't started by him nor was it his responsibility as your phrase implies. Why are you so uncooperative? I have suggest several proposals that are not misleading, you rejected them arguing they were "euphemisms". Will you reject this other neutral proposal: "which was at war with much of Europe."? Blaue Max (talk) 21:16, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Uncooperative to your point of view, yes, because it is not neutral. Napoleon has a bloody history; I can't believe you are denying that. The fact that you are denying it shows that you are pushing POV. Here is a quote from Napoleon himself: "I am not afraid to admit that I have waged war too much. I wanted to assure for France the mastery of the world."[2] If Napoleon himself is not afraid to admit it, why are you? Vrac (talk) 23:30, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia articles and especially the one related to history need to be neutral. If Napoleon torn Europe in pieces, it would be showed and detailed in the article. It is not wise, nor in compliance with the Wikipedia rules to insert such affirmations without a development, explanations and examples. Some users have proposed several alternative wording in order to satisfy everyone and comply with the rules of Wikipedia. I don't understand why you keep refusing all the proposals, and keep with the sentence that is definitely not neutral and can lead to a war editing. I don't have any sympathy for Napoleon. But we are not here to express our resentments. Please let's keep to the facts, and the readers would be able to make their own perception of this dictator. I thing that would be the best to turn the page, and focus on the essential, the historical facts.--Gabriel HM (talk) 01:21, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
You seem to have missed the essence of the dispute: at issue is whether or not to use the phrase "waged war". Many sources use this phrase for Napoleon's actions, including Napoleon himself, which makes it perfectly acceptable and appropriate for use in Wikipedia. I did not say "Napoleon torn [sic] Europe in [sic] pieces", nor do I have a resentment against Napoleon. I do, however, object to using phrases like "dominated" as euphemisms for making war. Vrac (talk) 01:44, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
It is not because you find the terms "Napoleon", "waged" and "war" in a random sentence that it proves your point. It need a source which explains in a neutral and comprehensive way that Napoleon attacked defenseless and peaceful coalitions as your phrase suggests. And why do you object the proposed sentence "was at war" instead of "waged war" which is rejected by everyone but you, if it's not to push your point of view that Napoleon was a bloody man ? Blaue Max (talk) 08:09, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Blaue Max, Vrac, passez par un arbitrage, car on est devant un blocage me semble t'il....--Gabriel HM (talk) 11:32, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Blaue Max: perhaps you missed the part where Napoleon said: "I am not afraid to admit that I have waged war too much". That is not a random phrase. I have provided ample evidence that the phrase "waged war" is commonly used in this situation. In linguistics this is referred to as an attested form. So far your evidence consists of "Napoleon loved tits". The WP:BURDEN is on you to show that Napoleon did not wage war. I'm at a loss to guess how you would do that given that Napoleon himself says he waged war. "Everyone" at this point consists of you and one other editor, not much of a consensus yet. Vrac (talk) 13:18, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
The essence of the dispute is your phrase "waged war with much of Europe", which better emphasized, as you admitted, the "sanguinary history of Napoleon"... Three users have already mentioned the misleading nature of your contribution and you're refusing any compromise, the sign of a disruptive editor. WP:DE In fact, the whole sentence is to be rewrited, as your sentence reduce Napoleon's rule to war, while the original version [3] referred also to culture and politics. Another reason to undone your NPOV edit. Blaue Max (talk) 14:14, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
It's not my phrase. I didn't put it in there, I didn't "rewrited [sic]" it, and I certainly didn't invent it. I count one user other than yourself that agrees with you. If you think I'm being disruptive, ANI is that way. Otherwise open an RFC if you want the text removed. It would be interesting to hear from editors who are not French. Vrac (talk) 17:56, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
It's "your" phrase since your the only one defending it. The user who originally changed the text apparently renounced to defend his own sentence... Three people have already pointed out the misleading nature of "your" phrase [4], [5] and me. It's not a problem of being French or not, no reasonable user would defend "your" phrase, as it reduces Napoleon's role in history to warmongering, which is historically inaccurate and blatantly NPOV. I would open a RFC, if only I knew how to do it... Blaue Max (talk) 19:13, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────WP:RFC#Request comment on articles, policies, or other non-user issues Vrac (talk) 19:53, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

back to the statement that he dominated Europe. After he won a war he took control And typically installed his own family members as kings or rulers (Spain, Netherlands, Italy, large parts of Germany, etc) (he also dominated Switzerland and Poland without putting his brother-in-law in charge). That's political dominance-- but it goes beyond that, as in most places he imposed French-style laws, modernized the legal system, abolished feudalism, abolished the Jewish ghetto, ended the Holy Roman Empire, consolidated or ended most Bishop-run states, changed the role of the Catholic Church, etc. etc. I suggest the domination factor, separately from the military factor, is emphasized in every textbook on European history, and should be included here. Rjensen (talk) 12:35, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
@Rjensen: To be clear on what you are suggesting, are you recommending including the "domination" or replacing the "wage war" with domination? Vrac (talk) 13:16, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
we need both. 1) we need to say that he fought a series of wars in a complex changing set of coalitions (major countries--eg Prussia, Russia, Austria, etc-- were his ally at one point & then switched)! 2) We ALSO need to stress his role in spreading revolutionary French civic ideals (re civil law, Church, feudalism, bishoprics, ghettoes). Rjensen (talk) 14:06, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
I agree. My specific issue here is that I object to glossing over the fact that Napoleon waged war because, as has been suggested above, he shares no responsibility in the matter. That strikes me as revisionist history. Vrac (talk) 14:38, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
The original version ("Napoleon declared the First French Empire and dominated European affairs for over a decade and had a long-lasting impact on Western culture. Following its ultimate defeat at the end of the Napoleonic Wars, France endured a tumultuous succession of governments") emcompassed the cultural, political and military roles of Napoleon. Until Vrac modified this sentence to reduce Napoleon's role to warmongering ("Napoleon declared the First French Empire, which waged war with much of Europe."), see [6]. So now, Vrac, you agree to return to the original version ? Great, that's what I was asking for...Blaue Max (talk) 16:15, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Proposition based on Rjensen's suggestions: "Napoleon declared the First French Empire and fought a complex changing set of coalitions during the Napoleonic Wars. He dominated European affairs for over a decade and had a long-lasting impact on Western culture. Following its ultimate defeat at the end of the Napoleonic Wars, France endured a tumultuous succession of governments." Blaue Max (talk) 16:27, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Ok never mind. This is getting silly and I don't want to waste any more time on it. I accept your proposition. Vrac (talk) 00:17, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Well I want to challenge the the wording of the last sentence: Following its ultimate defeat at the end of the Napoleonic Wars, France endured a tumultuous succession of governments." I think the ultimate defeat was at Waterloo, which was followed by a pretty stable Bourbon government 1815-30. How about this: "following Napoleon's final defeat at Waterloo in 1815, the conservative Bourbons were restored to power, but they did not undo all of the changes made by the French Revolution and by Napoleon." Rjensen (talk) 11:22, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Compared to the subsequent regimes - the July monarchy (18 years) and the Second Empire (18 years)- the Bourbon restoration only lasted 15 years and was pretty unstable, the whole period was marked by political tensions (see Chambre introuvable, Second White Terror and Anti-Sacrilege Act) between the Ultra-royalists and the Orléanists regarding the Charter of 1814, which resulted in the victory of the Orleanists. Keep in mind that this is only the lead of a very general article, please try to keep it concise. The current version correctly describes the "tumultuous succession of governments" with the French governement changing every 15 or 18 years. Blaue Max (talk) 12:10, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
yes but we're talking about Napoleon--not the next 30 years till his nephew Napoleon III shows up. Perhaps we should say the conservative Bourbons were restored but they did not drastically change the legal-social-economic system of 1814. Rjensen (talk) 13:35, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
In order to keep it short and to keep the structure of the text unchanged, maybe we could formulate it as follows: "He dominated European affairs for over a decade and had a long-lasting impact on Western culture. Most of his legal and social achievements survived his reign. Following its ultimate defeat at the end of the Napoleonic Wars, France endured a tumultuous succession of governments."? Keep in mind that the French Renaissance (three centuries) is reduced to two sentences in the lead and that the reigns of Louis XIV, Louis XV and Louis XVI are reduced to a single sentence. Napoleon has already two/three sentences for hismelf. Blaue Max (talk) 15:18, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 October 2015[edit]

Slamdude (talk) 18:53, 22 October 2015 (UTC) food

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 19:15, 22 October 2015 (UTC)


The words List of countries by population in 2005 after the number of metropolitan inhabitants in the infobox need to be removed. — 37 (talk) 16:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. Rob984 (talk) 18:14, 15 November 2015 (UTC)


I want to overwrite the file for the French flag, but I can't. I've created a version with corrected patone specifications.

I want to change this

— Preceding unsigned comment added by ChizzleDonkey (talkcontribs) 16:23, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

assimilation and integration of muslim[edit]

I quote current article: "Simultaneously France renounced the assimilation of immigrants, where they were expected to adhere to French traditional values and cultural norms. They were encouraged to retain their distinctive cultures and traditions and required merely to integrate" As a French, I strongly believe that is misleading, France still want people to assimilate (we believe skin color does not matter but culture does, and what make france france is our culture and way of living), people from other origin than the Muslim still do assimilate. And if the Muslim does not assimilate, it is not because of a France policy, but because they themselves do not want to assimilate and they want to keep their distinctive culture. (second generation of Chinese still assimilate totally for example) The refusal to assimilate was not a big problem as long as their were a small minority, but become problems once they reach a big part of the population and start to ask France to change our way of life to accommodate their believe (like requesting separation of women and men in swimming pool etc...) Killy-the-frog (talk) 04:23, 18 November 2015 (UTC)