Talk:Strasbourg
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Strasbourg received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
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 contextv means "determined or disposed to go counter to what is expected or desired". Not a hint of trolling involved. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 10:57, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
- B-Class WikiProject Cities articles
- All WikiProject Cities pages
- B-Class former country articles
- B-Class Holy Roman Empire articles
- Unknown-importance Holy Roman Empire articles
- Holy Roman Empire task force articles
- WikiProject Former countries articles
- B-Class France articles
- Top-importance France articles
- All WikiProject France pages
- B-Class Germany articles
- High-importance Germany articles
- WikiProject Germany articles
- Old requests for peer review