Talk:France

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeFrance was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 3, 2020Good article nomineeNot listed
In the newsA news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on September 19, 2012.

Pronunciation in the wrong language.[edit]

Someone accidentally put the French pronunciation of France in the audio clip instead of the English pronunciation. 24.116.97.236 (talk) 18:08, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the same thing in the Paris article. M.Bitton (talk) M.Bitton (talk) 18:15, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
MOS:LEADPRON says Do not include pronunciations for names of foreign countries whose pronunciations are well known in English (France, Poland). An HTML comment in the wikitext (citing a MOS page which doesn't exist) says Do not add English pronunciation, which may have been misinterpreted to mean add French pronunciation instead. I've boldly removed it. Certes (talk) 18:41, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure any of you really understood WP:MOSPRON before making those changes because the guidelines there only apply for providing English IPA's for articles like France and Poland. And I will mention that the French pronunciation for either France or Paris are certainly not commonly known in English, otherwise nearly everyone would have pronounced France and Paris the French language way. So I have boldly reverted the removal of French IPA & audio clips for both the France & Paris articles while keeping English IPA's excluded from them as per those finer details of WP:MOSPRON. Plus in any case, I think its both absurd & inappropriate to exclude the native French pronunciation when most Wikipedia articles feature the native language IPA's for many countries (e.g. Portugal, Belarus, Romania, Indonesia etc.) or capital cities (e.g. Berlin, Madrid, Amsterdam, Stockholm, Oslo etc.) - even though Poland was mentioned above in this topic, I will point out that the Polish name & IPA for the country is still there in the Poland article. Broman178 (talk) 21:36, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History : Presence in Africa[edit]

Could someone remove this assertion "In that year, French troops began the conquest of Algeria, establishing the first colonial presence in Africa since Napoleon's abortive invasion of Egypt in 1798." as this is not true.

French presence in Gorée and Saint-Louis, Senegal was unchallenged since at least 1814.


Thank you

2A02:2788:925:E1AD:CD4:5FAE:E3F0:9A4B (talk) 04:57, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you're correct. I've removed that assertion. Largoplazo (talk) 10:31, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 January 2024[edit]

In the section Sport in Culture, remove the "will host" in the sentence "France has hosted events such as the 1938 and 1998 FIFA World Cups,[392] the 2007 Rugby World Cup,[393] and will host the 2023 Rugby World Cup." as the event has now happened. Okynok (talk) 12:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Largoplazo (talk) 12:55, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of length template[edit]

This edit by User:Nikkimaria adds a length template to this article. I don't understand the justification for the edit, which Nikkimaria does not elaborate in edit history. In order to improve this article, I'm asking for some guidance about what specifically needs to be improved rather than (→‎top: per talk), which Nikkimaria does not adress the situation. Since the length template's introduction, a number of editors have put effort into reducing unnecessary or lengthy information. When the template was introduced, the article had 294,548 bytes. When this talk discussion was created, it had a length of 274,105 bytes. However, reading the article now, many statements are not excessively long. Therefore, I'm at a loss as to why the length template would apply here, or what would need to be changed to justify removing it. Clarification would be appreciated, and absent any clarification I will WP:BEBOLD and remove it. Cleter (talk) 15:30, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "many statements are not excessively long"? The tag isn't about the length of individual statements. Largoplazo (talk) 16:48, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just addressing the individual statements along with the rest of what is claimed to be a long article. Chill out. Cleter (talk) 17:40, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am also not sure what you mean by individual statements. If you mean individual sections, the History section is for example over 4,500 words. CMD (talk) 02:04, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed - Cleter, the previous discussion (now archived) offers some specific areas for improvement. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:11, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for making it clear that the achieved discussion was settled, it is clear more bytes need to be removed. This discussion may come to a consensus to keep the template, should there be no objections. Cleter (talk) 03:12, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]