Talk:Zone rouge

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Zone rouge article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Environment Mid‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

France Mid‑importance

	France portal 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: European / French / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	French military history task force
	World War I task force

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

May 24 to 30, 2015 (13th)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 08:33, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zone rouge (First World War) → Zone rouge – Only meaning of any importance. Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 11:55, 3 July 2012 (UTC) PatGallacher (talk) 17:20, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question / comment – Why isn't this at "Red Zone (World War I)", with a redirect from the French name? I notice that Red Zone points to "Red Zone (World War I)" and that that the zone is referred to as the Red Zone (using English) in at least one place in the article. Shouldn't the English Wikipedia use English for the primary title? (The English-language sourcing for this article seems a bit weak, by the way.) Also, why isn't the "r" in "Rouge" capitalized? –BarrelProof (talk) 23:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- I will attempt to answer these questions. The "r" is not capitalized because the French article is spelt this way, presumably this is the established name in French. There may not be many sources available in English. We have to have some way of disambiguating from other meanings of Red Zone, which we should use is moot. PatGallacher (talk) 00:32, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support as the only article for the title currently on Wikipedia. -- JHunterJ (talk) 02:14, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

"as arsenic can constitute up to 17% of some soil samples"

I don't have access to the source, but this seems like a transcription error. Commercial arsenic ores are about 2%, so a soil sample that's 17% arsenic would be mined. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.113.160.71 (talk) 22:18, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The upper 5-20 cm soil layer at the referenced site consists of ash from destroyed munitions. Measurement of this ash at one point recorded 17% arsenic by weight (as arsenic oxides) -- and this after ongoing leaching into the top 2m soil layer. The arsenic came from shells that were mostly arsenic by weight, and arsenic is not destroyed by burning: the ash had and has very high concentration of arsenic. Aside: the arsenic compounds were intended as adjuncts to make gas masks ineffective, but in use were not dispersed successfully by the artillery system. After munition destruction, the arsenic is just a heavy-metal soil contaminant 124.187.219.128 (talk) 04:04, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I reacted to this as well. 175g arsenic per kg of soil sounds ridiculous, but that's just my intuition with little to back it up. Could it be a mix-up stemming from how some languages (like English) use the comma as a thousands separator, whereas some other languages like mine (Swedish) use the comma as a decimal point? In other words, is it possible that the "175,907 mg" was meant as "almost 176 mg", but at some point was interpreted as "almost 176 g"?? Visminister (talk) 11:42, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here’s a link to the abstract of the article cited as the source for that figure: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969707004986. It gives the number: « Besides, some Cu (cmax. = 16,877 mg/kg) and Pb (cmax. = 26,398 mg/kg) in this layer, As (cmax. = 175,907 mg/kg) and Zn (cmax. = 133,237 mg/kg) were detected in very high concentrations » Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 11:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Messy nessy

"The Real "No-Go Zone" of France: A Forbidden No Man's Land Poisoned by War". 26 May 2015. cites as a source https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_rouge_(s%C3%A9quelles_de_guerre).

This makes it effectively unreliable.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:34, 15 February 2019 (UTC).[reply]

"Unexploded ordinance" links to this article

Maybe an idea to link back? T46.212.185.190 (talk) 21:59, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Current map?

The map in the article shows the damage immediately after the Great War.

Is there a current map, that shows the damage after a century of clean-up efforts? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 16:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Belgian version?

Presumably the same sort of thing carried on into Belgium ... can anyone link to an equivalent on their experience and response? Not sure about other areas that might have had a similar experience ... the Isonzo Valley or the Karst Plateau perhaps? 82.1.7.158 (talk) 15:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]