Talk:Strasbourg
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Strasbourg 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 |
This level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Expansion and translation
There's been tag on the article for a year now, asking for information to be included from the fr.wiki article. This is almost certainly a good idea, as the fr.wiki article is unsurprisingly much more comprehensive - but which parts in particular would editors like to seen brought over? Knepflerle (talk) 13:58, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- Economy and social structure, in particular. But the history section could still be expanded a lot more. --RCS (talk) 14:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
--Uhh, it notes in the text that King Phillip of Swabia granted the city of Strassbourg the status of Imperial Free City in 1262, but on the King Phillip of Swabia page it notes that he died in 1208. Since he would have been dead for 54 years by the time he granted Strassbourg that status, it seems unlikely that he was responsible. Voxexmachina (talk) 05:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Uhh! Funny what? This is but one of hundreds of times that extant printed pages or handwritten pages of information conflict with our existing chronology! Since this is but one of hundreds, just how is it now explained?96.19.156.227 (talk) 20:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes
Xavier Leroux
According to the WP article, Leroux was born in Italy, not Strasbourg. Does anyone know any more than I do about this? LynwoodF. 213.48.46.141 (talk) 11:12, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
- Since no one has come up with a justification for the unsubstantiated assertion, I have undone the relevant edit. LynwoodF (talk) 15:23, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Etymology
An anonymous edit without an edit summary was claiming a Greek origin for the element -bourg or -burg. It is certainly cognate with English borough and may well also be cognate with a similar Greek word, but I have no evidence that it is derived from Greek. I have undone what is no doubt a good-faith, but naïve edit. LynwoodF (talk) 19:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Discussion moved to User talk:LynwoodF
|
---|
Le plus surprenant en regardant ton profil c'est que tu es probablement francophile (on n'apprend pas le francais, et on n'affiche pas les armoiries du Dauphiné par hasard). Aussi j'imagine que ma contribution à été perdue dans la traduction. Mon intervention était liée uniquement au mot bourg, sans lien direct avec la ville dont est liée la page de discussion. Bonne continuation --Gabriel Haute Maurienne (talk) 13:06, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Re LynwoodF étant donné que cette partie de la discussion n'est pas liée à l'article, permet moi de te répondre en francais puisque tu le maîtrise sans doute mieux que moi l'anglais. Pour l'origine grecque, je pense, mais je n'ai pas de certitude ni de source, que c'est probablement lié à la version qui soutient l'origine latine du terme. Partant de là, il est techniquement possible d'arguer de la réflexion suivante: étant donné que de nombreux mots latins viennent du grec, il est probable que bourg en provienne également toujours selon cette théorie. A croire les hellénophones, toutes les langues viennent du grec 😜. Enfin pour le déclin de certaines langues régionales frontalières, si beaucoup ne faisait pas le raccourci entre racine du dialecte parlé = nationalité je suis sûr que leur statut se porterait bien mieux. Ce n'est pas un hasard si de nombreux dialectes germaniques ont drastiquement régressé après les deux guerres mondiales, ou certains ont justifié leurs annexions territoriale unilatérales forcées sur ce simple critère. Enfin si tu jettes un œil sur les deux discussions que j'ai en ce moment, tu constateras que certains semblent mélanger réalité et fantasmes de grandeurs, quitte à inventer des sources qui s'autoalimentent. Amicalement --Gabriel Haute Maurienne (talk) 15:27, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
|
What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content! Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 09:01, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Strasbourg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081016001550/http://www.dresden.de:80/en/02/11/c_03.php to http://www.dresden.de/en/02/11/c_03.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:00, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
River navigation
There has been a difference of opinion today about the use of this term. Here is my contribution to the discussion:
- "River navigation" is the normal expression in English for what is being discussed. It is perfectly normal in English to use a noun as though it were an adjective in order to modify a following noun. An expression which immediately leapt into my mind was "cliff path". There are plenty more, e.g. "cotton socks".
- "Fluvial" is used in English chiefly in geological expressions. See The Oxford Dictionary of English.
LynwoodF (talk) 14:18, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hi LynwoodF, thanks for sharing your view in the talk page instead of reverting. It seems that I was wrong, (and you were right), you are welcome to cancel my edit. Sorry, but being native French speaker, I was misleaded by the word. Sorry for the inconvenience.--Gabriel HM (talk) 15:38, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hello, Gabriel HM. Thank you for your reply. I see that the wording has been changed again. LynwoodF (talk) 16:33, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Does the Ill flow into the Rhine in Strasbourg
The geography section of the article starts:
- Strasbourg is on the Eastern border of France, on the Ill River where it flows into the Rhine on the border with Germany, across from the German town Kehl.
My first reaction was to say that is wrong, on the grounds that Ill continues to flow north parallel to the Rhine for c.20km before the two rivers actually meet. But then I began to doubt. Certainly that is what modern maps show, but they also show several waterways linking the two rivers in Strasbourg. Those waterways have canal names, and look like canals, but appearances and names can be deceptive, and it wouldn't be the first time a natural watercourse had been obliterated by its conversion into a much wider and straighter canal.
So I guess my question is, before people started digging extra channels, was there a natural connection between the Ill and the Rhine in Strasbourg, or is the only natural channel of the Ill the one that continues down to Offendorf before entering the Rhine. Either way, I think we need to elaborate that sentence, but best to know the facts (and pick up a cite or two) first. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 16:41, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
- Here is a very technical and extensive article from 1919, in French, on the subject. It deals with how in the late 19th-century and early 20th-century Strasbourg created a new port along canals that were specially dug to connect the Ill and the Rhine, whose natural flow had been modified by the Germans. I hope this helps... --Edelseider (talk) 19:13, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
- And here you can see that the little stream Steingiessen (length: 4.4 km, according to http://www.annuaire-mairie.fr/ruisseau-le-steingiessen.html), which runs through the Strasbourg district of La Robertsau, does indeed connect the Ill and the Rhine through natural means. --Edelseider (talk) 20:23, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Remind
Just a remind. Some important naming conventions which the article's lead violates (WP:LEAD#General guidelines and WP:LEAD#Separate section usage): Once a Names or Etymology section or paragraph is created, the alternative English or foreign names should not be moved back to the first line. As an exception, a local official name different from a widely accepted English name should be retained in the lead. (Foreign language: Local name; known also by several alternative names)".' If the case is exceptional, common sense may be applied to ignore all rules. Please discuss to decide if this is an exceptional case.2A02:2430:3:2500:0:0:B807:3DA0 (talk) 03:55, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think this is an issue. The very purpose of an article lead is to summarise the important bits of the following article. And Strasbourg's location on both national and linguistic boundaries is absolutely crucial to any understanding of its story. It would be perverse not to include this in the lead just because of a bit of WP bureaucracy that was clearly intended to discourage inclusion of non-crucial information in the lead. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 12:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- BTW perversion means something else, is the comment above something like trolling?2A02:2430:3:2500:0:0:B807:3DA0 (talk) 19:32, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Anonymous users lecturing non-anonymous users cannot be taken seriously. Take an user name like everybody else or stop playing the Wikipedia policeman. --Edelseider (talk) 20:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- To my mind, rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of the wise. In my experience, Chris j wood and Edelseider have both done good work on articles connected with Strasbourg and, if they are both happy with the lead, I can tell you all that I am reasonably happy with it too. LynwoodF (talk) 21:47, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you LynwoodF. You certainly speak and act wisely! --Edelseider (talk) 09:44, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
- Just for the record, perverse in this context means "determined or disposed to go counter to what is expected or desired". No trolling involved. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 10:57, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Armenians in Strasbourg
I made a small mistake with this edit: the author is Noëlla Richard, not Richard Noëlla. See also https://publication-theses.unistra.fr/public/memoires/2012/IEP/2012_RICHARD_Noella.pdf for the full text. --Edelseider (talk) 14:35, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you, Edelseider. I was suspicious about the 30,000, and so I put a tag on the edit, but I thought you would know more about it than I do. I lived in Strasbourg over 50 years ago and things have changed a bit since then! I had a look at the pdf and found it interesting. LynwoodF (talk) 16:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
War edit with the German based IP 78.55.50.76
The user keep changing the sentence that was the fruit of a consensus. It is not accurate to state that the region was historically German speaking, since, many Germanic/alemanic languages and to to some extend romances dialects were initially spoken and are still spoken in the area. I tried to change it in many way (Germanic/alemanic) in order to reach a consensus, but he keeps reverting it to his initial edit. And finally attack me on my talk page saying that I'm an anti German person. I want to be clear by saying that the statement that he wants to change was here long before his intervention. And I just tried to keep it this way, I'm not the initiator of this war edit. I invited him many times to settle this issue on the talk page and he refused, preferring personal attacks on my talk page. I insist here by saying that the statement "historically German speaking" is not accurate since the standard German came in the region late and that most of the natives still now are speaking a Germanic dialect at home wich is different from the standard German. It is not correct to reduce the importance, the varieties and the cultural wealth of the different local dialects to the standard German. This German based IP contributor is new to wiki, and he is focused to add the word German, or a German translation of Alsatian names even in articles where a German translation is not relevant. This is not in the charter of Wikipedia to make personal attacks when we have a different on an article. He keeps saying that I should bring sources, eventhough and doesn't have any to sustain his affirmations.--Gabriel HM (talk) 14:54, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, Gabriel HM. I have seen some of this dispute going on in various places and I just wanted you to know that I understand what you are saying. We do not seem to know who this IP user is, but he (I definitely think it is a man.) has a poor understanding of historical linguistics and I suspect he has a political agenda. I am sure you know as well as I do the subtleties of the evolving linguistic situation in Alsace. When I lived in Strasbourg more than half a century ago, the default language in many areas of life was Alsatian, which was regarded as a regional language distinct from, although related to, German. As a neutral linguist with no axe to grind, I would regard it as a series of varieties of Alemannic German with an admixture of Gallicisms. Incidentally, the word Francization is regarded in British English as a specifically Canadian term. LynwoodF (talk) 17:09, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi Lynwood, thanks for you kind comment. I think that I know who is this IP. Furthermore I suspect this anonymous users to be in fact Renekm specialised in former German Territorites and its German name mostly during the nazi era, and that spends most of his time to give German names to all territories, cities, communes, provinces, forts etc [1] without any distinction, and even naming French maginot forts with a German translation, wich is very weird [2]. Indeed his last post under his name was just before I reverted his edit, and in the following hours he disappeared from Wikipedia, and the anonymous IP appeared and started to to do the same. It is shameful for lnguit and the wealth of the dialects and regional languages to truly to reduce them as nothing than the main standard form.
"Historically" means "in the past" and not the current situation. Historic developments should be adressed as such. The university of Strasburg e.g. was teaching in German until the revolution and not in Alsatian. There is a difference when speaking about the distant past. --78.55.50.76 (talk) 17:56, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Section 1918 to the present
The beginning of the section "1918 to the present" should be reworked. It was apparently written by someone with the aim of downplaying support for France in Strasbourg in 1918. Several points appear dubious or are missing:
- unverifiable parallel history: "It is doubtful whether a referendum in Strasbourg would have ended in France's favour"
- a link to the map of German Reichstag election results in 1912, without explaining the context of that election (in 1912, 41 years after annexation, decline of the autonomist vote everywhere in Alsace, not just Strasbourg, one year before the Saverne Affair which rekindled it, and 2 years before a war nobody in Alsace could have imagined in 1912)
- no mention of the brutal policies of the German Army during WW1 (martial law imposed on the local inhabitants, bad treatment of their conscripts sent to the Eastern front for fear they would desert to the French, etc) which combined with the Saverne Affair greatly antagonized the Alsatians and changed their feelings toward Germany
- no mention of the huge crowds of cheering Strasbourgeois who welcomed the arrival of the French troops in November 1918, and the pro-French fervor which so impressed the American correspondents
ព្រះមហាក្សត្ររាជ (talk) 14:37, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
History of Strasbourg
Material from Strasbourg was split to History of Strasbourg on 29 May 2017 from this version. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. |
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Strasbourg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101204060533/http://www.ceaac.org/html/espace_public/pourtales/frame.htm to http://www.ceaac.org/html/espace_public/pourtales/frame.htm
- Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160516192907/http://ccfr.bnf.fr/portailccfr/servlet/ViewManager?menu=menu_view&record=rnbcd_fonds:FONDS:853&setCache=rnbcd_fonds.FONDS to http://ccfr.bnf.fr/portailccfr/servlet/ViewManager?menu=menu_view&record=rnbcd_fonds%3AFONDS%3A853&setCache=rnbcd_fonds.FONDS
- Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160518062629/http://www.alsace.equipement.gouv.fr/pdf/GCO-DUP-Doc_Publ.pdf to http://www.alsace.equipement.gouv.fr/pdf/GCO-DUP-Doc_Publ.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101002090459/http://www.leicester.gov.uk/your-council-services/lc/twinning/ to http://www.leicester.gov.uk/your-council-services/lc/twinning/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:30, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Salzburg disambiguation
Is this a joke? Do we really expect people to confuse Strasbourg and Salzburg?
I tried to remove it but got a bunch of crazy template warnings in the preview. Can someone who knows how to do it please remove this absolutely nonsensical disambiguation? --91.34.39.52 (talk) 21:54, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
- You are right. It was a joke, or vandalism, which is the same, eventually. Thank you for pointing it out. --Edelseider (talk) 08:15, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks!
- I had in fact looked for a Strasbourg disambiguation and there is none. Now I am surprised to see that the Strasburg disambiguation page does in fact include Strasbourg (plus a number of other places spelled differently from Strasburg).
- Does the English Wikipedia commonly use disambiguation pages for misspellings? Or is there any language in which the name of the town is actually spelled "Strasburg"? --87.150.1.57 (talk) 12:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
- P.S. Yeah, must have been vandalism, btw. Look at this. Why someone would get an account only to make two such nonsensical edits is beyond me. :-) --87.150.1.57 (talk) 12:14, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
the fourth-largest river port in France after Nantes, Rouen and Bordeaux.
As far as I know, Strasbourg is the second river port in France. Nantes, Rouen and Bordeaux are in Esturies, with sea ships.
According to French wiki, Paris is the first river harbour ( Il est le deuxième port fluvial de France après le Port autonome de Paris et le deuxième port rhénan après Duisbourg .)
2A01:CB10:5AF:8C00:88FF:8A9E:5628:752D (talk) 08:54, 23 October 2019 (UTC) Jerome
- Absolutely. The person who edited that (now reverted, with new added sources) confused "ports" with "river ports". --Edelseider (talk) 10:14, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Native name etc
The German name should be given more prominence. It should appear in the native name section of the infobox, and also be put directly after the French name. I'm well aware that Alsace has its own vernacular(s), but Hochdeutsch has been used there intermittently in an official capacity and it is widely taught in schools.-86.180.91.149 (talk) 14:31, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- B-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Geography
- B-Class vital articles in Geography
- C-Class articles with conflicting quality ratings
- C-Class WikiProject Cities articles
- All WikiProject Cities pages
- B-Class former country articles
- B-Class Holy Roman Empire articles
- Top-importance Holy Roman Empire articles
- Holy Roman Empire task force articles
- WikiProject Former countries articles
- C-Class France articles
- Top-importance France articles
- All WikiProject France pages
- C-Class Germany articles
- High-importance Germany articles
- WikiProject Germany articles
- Old requests for peer review