Talk:Picardy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject France (Rated C-class, High-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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Needs map[edit]

A map would be helpful here - can anyone provide one, please? Rodparkes 03:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The map currently (19 Jan 2011) shown isn't correctly presenting Picardie (but Pas-de-Calais). The map on the French page is correct: Picardie_region_locator_map.svg … Fixed!

Merge with Picardie[edit]

Isn't Picardy and Picardie the same place and the two articles need to be merged? -- 4.240.78.237 (talk) 19:20, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Not actually. The one is the historical province, the other is the current administrative region. However, I do think that distinguishing them merely by the final letters is nonsensical. One is the English and the other the French spelling but the names are identical nonetheless. Str1977 (talk) 08:43, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
In French, we only say "Picardie", we don't have two words one for the administrative region and one for the historical province, they are the same! I don't understand why you mark this difference in English, it shouldn't!

http://global.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/459264/Picardy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E35:8A8D:FE80:D31:F23B:5D4B:C506 (talk) 11:24, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Move to talk[edit]

"Whimsical enough is the origin of the name of Picards, and from thence of Picardie, which does not date earlier than AD 1200. It was an academical joke, an epithet first applied to the quarrelsome humour of those students, in the University of Paris, who came from the frontier of France and Flanders. (Chapter LVIII - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire)"

What's this? It appears to be a quote from Gibbon. But we cannot simply put it into the article - it has to be integrated regarding NPOV and factual accuracy. Str1977 (talk) 08:41, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Picard people[edit]

The Picardy and Picardie articles can be linked to a future article describing the Picard people, a subcultural group or known as "La Nation du Picardie". I found a passage about the Picard people from the "Peoples of the Earth (series): volume 3 Europe" published by Joseph Clarke of the Danbury Press, that can be very useful and informative to contribute in related articles on Picardy like the Picard language. It can be found in the Glossary section of the book in France and the Low Countries, with illustrations of sample persons representative of the regions they came from: The Picards live in an area of northern France, east of Normandy. In Roman times their land was known as Belgica Secunda and not until the 13th century were the Picards recognized when Charlemagne had his capital at Noyon. Their language was at that time Gallo-Latin and the people were of mixed Celtic-Roman decent. Another movement, of the Flemish people, brought both a fresh cultural impulse and new skills -- especially those of weaving for which the Picards have become famous. + Mike D 26 (talk) 04:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Merge redux[edit]

I know there was a merge proposal a few years ago, but I really think it needs to be discussed again. As a reader, it's incredibly confusing to a) notice and b) figure out the difference between a historical region and a current one (as evidenced by the fact that I began editing this article thinking it was woefully narrow in scope and only hours later realized there's another Picardy article... but I still can't figure out where some of the historical facts should go!). Both articles are fairly short, and I think they would both be improved by being combined into one complete GA- or FA-length article. If anyone cares and strongly objects, please speak up! Accedietalk to me 02:17, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree. It's confusing to have both, especially since they are each so short. XOXOXO, Dave (djkernen)|Talk to me|Please help! 16:03, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Cool, glad you agree. Let's wait a bit longer for others to comment, and if there's no disagreement I'm happy to try to work them into one nice, comprehensive article :) Accedietalk to me 03:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Agree. There is very little overlap between the two articles, even though essentially they are both about the same place. Merging them should provide a better (and longer) article. Wilfridselsey (talk) 11:47, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

  • Okay, it looks like this is pretty non-controversial. I'll start merging. Accedietalk to me 00:41, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Terrible merge[edit]

By merging these articles without anybody involved having any idea what they're doing, we now have no article that really discusses Picardy as a historical province. The map of the historical region was also removed without any discussion as being "incorrect." There ought to be one article about the historical province, and a separate article about the modern day region, which has very different borders. The historical province is significantly more important than the region, which has only existed for 30 years, especially since French regions have rather indistinct governmental roles (most governmental functions are carried out at the departmental or communal level, not at the regional one). john k (talk) 22:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

It's easy[edit]

Create an article "Picardy (historical province) and another "Picardy (French region) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E35:8A8D:FE80:D31:F23B:5D4B:C506 (talk) 11:29, 8 November 2014 (UTC)