Talk:France/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Geography

Location and Borders

A relief map of Metropolitan France, showing cities with over 100,000 inhabitants.

France has the World's second largest territorial waters.

The European part of France is called Metropolitan France and it is located in one of the occidental ends of Europe. It is bordered by the North Sea in the north, the English Channel in the north-west, the Atlantic Ocean in the west and the Mediterranean sea in the south-east. It borders Belgium and Luxembourg in the north east. It also borders Germany and Switzerland in the east, Italy and Monaco in the south-east, Spain and Andorra in the south west. The borders in the south and in the east of the country are mountain ranges: the Pyrenees, the Alps and the Jura, the border in the east is from the Rhine river, while the border in the north and the north east melts in no natural elements. Due to its shape, it is often referred to in French as l'Hexagone ("The Hexagon"). Metropolitan France includes various islands: Corsica and coastal islands. Metropolitan France is situated mostly between latitudes 41° and 53° N, and longitudes 6° W and 10° E, on the western edge of Europe, and thus lies within the northern temperate zone. Its continental part covers about 1000 km from north to south and from east to west. they also loved americans and the efle tower they great freands with gorge washington --72.2.103.236 (talk) 17:54, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Religion

In the beginning it's said 47% are Christianity while in the demographic page, it's says different it's 51.1% for Christianity. Aakashmajumdar (talk) 16:53, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

France's southern neighbors

Shall we continue to 'also' list the Catalan Republic? Right now, it's considered to no longer exist (if it ever did) & hasn't gotten any recognition from UN members. GoodDay (talk) 17:26, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

• Meh. The current wording is and Andorra and Spain (including the unrecognised Catalan Republic) in the south and southwest. If it's what it takes to keep the edit warriors away of the article, I say it's worth it. Or maybe change the parentheses to (including Catalonia)? Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:56, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Globe map option in infobox

I've added an option to see France on a globe, rather then just in Europe. Interested in what everyone's thoughts are on this? Countries outside of Europe often have globe projections, so the alternative perspective might be helpful? If it's been reverted, here's a permanent link to the revision: https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=France&oldid=809247099

I also though maybe a globe centred on France (rather then Europe), which doesn't highlight the EU/Europe might be better? I.e. File:France (orthographic projection).svg.

I'm just trying it out on this article (since France is the biggest country in the EU), but it's something that can be done for all European countries.

Rob984 (talk) 23:42, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Rousseau was french ???

I doubt you can really consider Rousseau a French philosopher. Like his parents he was born in Geneva, grew up in Geneva, had the citizenship of Geneva and spent a large part of his live in Switzerland (Geneva, Neuchatelle, Bern ...). True, he also spent a large part of his live in France but that doesn't really make him french yet. It's simply not entirely correct. It's kind of like saying Einstein was an American Physicist (He got the American citizenship), Euler was a Russian Mathematician (lived most of his live in Saint Petersburg - He's from Switzerland) or Copernicus was a German Astronomer (spoke German and spent a lot of time in Prussia - Nonetheless he was undoubtedly Polish). Besides Tin tin isn't a french Comic either. Even though Rousseau spoke French and was interred as a national hero in the Pantheon in Paris, this does not make him a French Philosopher that should be mentioned in the Wikipedia page about France. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valmendil (talk • contribs) 18:01, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

For that reason I removed the following sentence from the section about french philosophy: " In The Social Contract, Jean-Jacques Rousseau openly criticised the European divine right monarchies and strongly affirmed the principle of the sovereignty of the people. " Revert it if you strongly disagree with me here. But in that case at least mention that he wasn't born in France. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valmendil (talk • contribs) 18:09, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on France. 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/20120402173028/http://www.coi-ioc.org/index.php?id=36 to http://www.coi-ioc.org/index.php?id=72

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) 02:27, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on France. 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/20110104104316/http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Europe/France-AGRICULTURE.html to http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Europe/France-AGRICULTURE.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071224180811/http://www2.culture.gouv.fr/deps/mini_chiff_03/fr/musee.htm to http://www2.culture.gouv.fr/deps/mini_chiff_03/fr/musee.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://unstats.un.org/unsd/environment/air_co2_emissions.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://teo_english.site.ined.fr/
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.ined.fr/fr/tout-savoir-population/chiffres/france/flux-immigration/annee-continent/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110525201508/http://www.humanistictexts.org/montaigne.htm to http://www.humanistictexts.org/montaigne.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/fr.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090207004853/http://ucblibraries.colorado.edu/govpubs/for/france.htm to http://ucblibraries.colorado.edu/govpubs/for/france.htm

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) 10:45, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Image gallaries

Not sure that this country overview article is being helped by images gallaries of food and building. Both these gallaries should be move to the parent article with a few left here for each section. So the question is what images should we keep? WP:IG....images in main articles should complement the text....not just jamed in...can think of many more relevant images for this country then plates of food. --Moxy (talk) 23:56, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2018

82.149.40.14 (talk) 15:48, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

In my opinion reunification of France was in 507, after the battle of Voullé, and not in 486 after the battle of Soissons (land south of Loire river was under Visigoths' control)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — IVORK _Discuss 21:39, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Languages

I am seriously disappointed by the fact that the language section only talks about French. Must I remind you that France is a linguistically diverse country.

Statistics

At the 1999 census, INSEE sampled 380,000 adult people all across Metropolitan France, and asked them questions about their family situation. One of the questions was about the languages that their parents spoke with them before the age of 5. This is the first time serious statistics were computed about the proportion of mother tongues in France. The results were published in Enquête familiale, Insee, 1999.

Here is a list of the nine most prominent mother tongues in France based on Enquête familiale.

Rank	Language	Mother tongue	Percentage of adult population
1	French spanish english porchigies	39,360,000	86% (note that this figure is an underestimate because people under 18 years of age were not surveyed; see note #2 below the table)
2	Germanic languages (Alsatian, Lorraine Franconian, etc.)	970,000 (of whom Alsatian: 660,000; standard German: 210,000; Lorraine Franconian: 100,000)	2.12% (of whom Alsatian: 1.44%; standard German: 0.46%; Lorraine Franconian: 0.22%)
3	Arabic (especially Maghrebi Arabic)	940,000	2.05%
4	Occitan language (Languedocian, Gascon, Provençal, etc.)	610,000 (another 1,060,000 had some exposure)	1.33% (another 2.32% had some exposure, see notes)
5	Portuguese	580,000	1.27%
6	Oïl languages (Picard, Gallo, Poitevin, Saintongeais, etc.)	570,000 (another 850,000 had some exposure)	1.25% (another 1.86% had some exposure, see notes)
7	Italian, Corsican and Ligurian (Niçard)	540,000	1.19%
8	Spanish	485,000	1.06%
9	Breton	280,000 (another 405,000 had some exposure)	0.61% (another 0.87% had some exposure, see notes)
10	About 400 other languages (Polish, Berber languages, East Asian languages, Catalan, Franco-Provençal, Corsican, Basque, West Flemish, etc.) as well as those who gave no response	2,350,000 (of whom English: 115,000)	5.12% (of whom English: 0.25% of total adult population)
	Total	45,762,000 (46,680,000 including those with two mother tongues who were counted twice)	102% (2% of people have both French and another language as their mother tongue, thus, they are counted twice)

If we add up people with mother tongue and people with some exposure to the language before the age of 5 (see note #3 below), then the five most important languages in metropolitan France are (note that the percentages add up to more than 100, because many people are now counted twice):

• French: 42,100,000 (92%)
• Occitan: 1,670,000 (3.65%)
• German and German dialects: 1,440,000 (3.15%)
• Oïl languages (excl. French): 1,420,000 (3.10%)
• Arabic: 1,170,000 (2.55%)

Notes on the table

1. The data in the table are about mother tongues, and not about actual language practice. It states that 14% of the adult people living in France in 1999 were born and raised up to the age of 5 in families that spoke only (or predominantly) some other languages than French. It does not mean that 14% of adult people in France spoke some other languages than French in 1999.
2. Only adults (i.e. 18 years and older) were surveyed. This means that French people born between 1981 and 1999 are not included in the survey. The mother tongue of the younger generations is more predominantly French than is the case with the older generations, because as the Enquête familiale survey explains, regional and immigrant language transmission decreases dramatically with each new generation, as French replaces the regional and immigrant languages. In the Enquête familiale survey, only 35% of parents whose mother tongue was a regional or immigrant language reported they spoke that language to their children. Thus, the 86% figure of people with French as their mother tongue is an underestimate because the younger generations whose predominant mother tongue is French are not counted.
3. The concept of "mother tongue" may not give a complete idea of the phenomenon of minority languages in France. This is because there are many people who were born and raised in families in which parents spoke to them only (or predominantly) French, but in which some regional or immigration languages were also occasionally used. One dialects was occasionally spoken. Some of these 1,060,000 people may speak Occitan as fluently as the 610,000 people who have it as a mother tongue, while some other (the majority, probably) have only a limited knowledge of Occitan. We cannot infer from this that 1,670,000 adults are speakers of Occitan, but it may be the case that the total number of people with some form of exposure to Occitan is higher than the 610,000 figure, though some of this number may have abandoned the language since then.

hi how r u doing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.0.209.130 (talk) 13:35, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Regional Languages

que hay prro? putoelquelolea Can regional languages be kept in the infobox? France is a very linguistically diverse country with territories scattered throughout the world. Every time I have added this field to the infobox, vandals have removed it and claimed that it is "unnecessary" without providing a real justification. Including this field is fundamentally necessary to maintain political neutrality. Refusing to acknowledge the very existence of minority languages pushes a heavily nationalistic political agenda. The inclusion of "regional languages" has nothing to do with any separatist movement. It merely acknowledges that languages exist within France other than French.

If vandals continue to make politically motivated edits, I suggest that this article be placed under protection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KartvelianCelt (talk • contribs) 18:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

something with the data doesn't work out

I remember the article said there are 7.5% muslims in France. and an estimate from 2003 says the ranfe is 8-10%. Now, after over a decade of higher birth rate among muslims, and immigration, how can it be lower (5.6%)? Also, on "Islam in France" it says 12.5% are muslims. Something with the data is strange. Similar thing happened on Finland article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.142.4.203 (talk) 06:38, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

It's telling that the article says "Estimates of the number of Muslims in France vary widely." Figures about numbers of people in a religion are always doubtful. The source used for the 6% figure in the Infobox, strangely titled "A French Islam is Possible", has a lot of detail about getting the numbers. It's at http://www.institutmontaigne.org/res/files/publications/a-french-islam-is-possible-report.pdf . Read Page 12 in particular. It basically says that the figure could be wildly inaccurate. HiLo48 (talk) 07:10, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

- So why do you use this one source if "the figure could be wildly inaccurate"? And why is this the only estimate that shown in the opening, what about the other estimates? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.142.4.203 (talk) 15:07, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Schengen Member

Some reference about France to be a member of the Schengen area is missing. Schengen2018 (talk) 11:22, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

About ethnic groups in France (but could also apply to religious groups)

I have noticed a problem, not only in this article but also in the infobox in country comparison of France–United States relations, in Religion in France, and in French people : despite the fact that no official data has ever been collected about ethnicity (or religion) in France, very bold claims are made on this topic like this one :

Most French people are of Celtic (Gauls) origin, with an admixture of Italic (Romans) and Germanic (Franks) groups. Different regions reflect this diverse heritage, with notable Breton elements in western France, Aquitanian in the southwest, Scandinavian in the northwest, Alemannic in the northeast and Ligurian influence in the southeast. Large-scale immigration over the last century and a half has led to a more multicultural society. In 2004, the Institut Montaigne estimated that within Metropolitan France, 51 million people were White (85% of the population), 6 million were Northwest African (10%), 2 million were Black (3.3%), and 1 million were Asian (1.7%).

I don't know what to do. On one hand, these claims are kind of sourced but, on the other, the numbers are extremely likely to be false because of French law forbidding the collection of such data (which is explained in the article of course but still...). In addition, most French people are not of Celtic origin : this is a very old misconception going back to the 19th century. Should I just remove the paragraph?

It is the same thing for the numbers about religious affiliation that are just as unreliable... Eleventh1 (talk) 20:44, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the certainty of figures such as those is very problematic. Don't know the solution. I'll be watching. HiLo48 (talk) 09:29, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Backwards copy of parts of this article in a published book

Hello, recently I have discovered that large parts of the history section from the article on Greece, have been plagiarised by the following book:

• D. Boldt, Andreas (2017-03-16), Historical Mechanisms: An experimental approach to applying scientific theories to the study of history, Routledge, ISBN 9781351816472

The book has a chapter on France, and with just a quick look I have identified at least one instance of plagiarism from this article. The book reads France was a member of the Triple Entente when World War I broke out. A small part of Northern France was occupied, but France and its allies emerged victorious against the Central Powers at a tremendous human and material cost followed by the interbellum years were marked by intense international tensions and a variety of social reforms ontroduced by the Popular Front government (annual leave, eight-hour workdays, and women in government). Both of which are present word-for-word in the lead paragraphs of the contemporary history section. I'm sure there is more blatant plagiarism in the book, the entire section of Greece was copied from Wikipedia. You might want to consider carrying out an investigation and placing {{Backwards copy}} to this talk page. --Michail (blah) 18:30, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Lack of objectivity in the history section

Upon reading the history section of this article (the contemporary period section to be more precise), I just wanted to express my upset toward what has become more of a record of French colonial crimes (from the invasion of Algeria to its decolonisation) rather than a fair account of its recent history.

I aim not at playing down the horrendous acts committed by French colonial forces. Still, I can’t help but think that this aspect of France’s contemporary history is way too emphasised in this article.

Indeed, the sole part listing the series of repressions that unfolded in France’s colonies after WW2 is 191-word long (this is to be compared with the length of the paragraphs devoted to WWI and the interwar period (93 words), WW2 and its aftermath (194 words) or the post-Gaullist era (91 words)). With the parts about the colonisation of Algeria and Morocco and the lines about the death tolls of Indochina and Algeria wars, nothing less than a quarter of the text about France’s history from 1830 onward is devoted to colonial massacres (while are missing major events like the Affaire Dreyfus, the industrialisation of the country or the Mitterrand era).

The emphasis put on this aspect of French history is all the more astonishing considering that so thorough accounts of colonial crimes are not to be found in other countries’ history sections (the UK, Japan or Portugal to name a few). Not to mention the fact that the depiction of some events is quite debatable (we could assume for instance that the repression of the “peaceful demonstrations” in Sétif resulted in the death of 40,000 people, while reality is a bit more complex).

The problem is that it results in a complete inaccurate view of French contemporary history. These actions, no matter how horrible, are quite irrelevant when it comes to provide a fair picture of France’s history over the past two centuries (this is not an article about the French colonial empire nor about decolonisation). A quick look at the French language article clearly shows how inconsequential these events are in what is the commonly shared view of France’s history (the vast majority of French people doesn’t know about any of theses events).

In the end, these addings makes the history section blatantly biased in its final part. I think it should be considered turning back to the prior version, while putting these elements in a more appropriate article (about the French colonial empire for instance). -- comment added by A French reader (talk) 01:02, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Joan of Arc

Joan of Arc was a young french Martyr who came from Domrèmy and was burnt at the stake in 1431 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.213.133.55 (talk) 18:49, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

establishment in the infobox

I think it is terribly misleading that in the infobox it claims the republic was established in the 1790s then jumps straight to eec accession. This is near enough deceitful. There have been dozens of different states of France. we are in the fifth republic for crying out loud. other countries clearly state similar things in their infobox. I request we put in the facts. France has been empires, republics and foreign invaded land since 1790s and to say it was a republic established then and nothing else is very misleading. it has even been nazi territory and had to fight for its independence. but no one thought to mention such a huge part of french history in the infobox and so I kindly request additional information. I could just add it myself but I know it will be removed for some kind of reason, the legitimacy of which would be very debateable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgepodros (talk • contribs) 16:24, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

I will be making the necessary changes if no one objects to this. I will put in the various dates which include foreign occupation, empires etc. Georgepodros ([[User talk:Georgepodros#top|talk] 12:54, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

A possible issue over religion

Hey, I’m French living in France. I was surprised to see the statistics in the beginning of the article. Indeed, religion is a always on debate so many serious newspapers have written about it such as « le monde ». The figures seem off, you may want to see this article to check if there is an issue or not, sorry it’s in French but it’s pretty much understandable. https://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/article/2015/05/07/une-grande-majorite-de-francais-ne-se-reclament-d-aucune-religion_4629612_4355770.html Lamiaux 88.172.31.6 (talk) 16:13, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Serment du Jeu de Paume - Jacques-Louis David.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:51, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2019

Change "During Louis XIV's minority and the regency of Queen Anne and Cardinal Mazarin, a period of trouble known as the Fronde occurred in France." to "During Louis' XIV minority and the regency of Queen Anne and Cardinal Mazarin, a period of trouble known as the Fronde occurred in France." Gerardogoldenberg (talk) 03:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: the current apostrophe placement is correct. Roadguy2 (talk) 03:40, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2019

change "The counter-revolution, begun in March 1793 in the Vendée, by July had spread to Brittany, Normandy, Bordeaux, Marseilles, Toulon, Lyon." to "The counter-revolution, begun in March 1793 in the Vendée, by July had spread to Brittany, Normandy, Bordeaux, Marseilles, Toulon and Lyon." Gerardogoldenberg (talk) 23:40, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done Roadguy2 (talk) 23:43, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2019

change "The abolition of slavery and male universal suffrage, both briefly enacted during the French Revolution were re-enacted in 1848. In 1852, the president of the French Republic, Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte, Napoleon I's nephew, was proclaimed emperor of the second Empire, as Napoleon III." to "The abolition of slavery and male universal suffrage, both briefly enacted during the French Revolution were re-enacted in 1848. In 1852, the president of the French Republic, Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte, Napoleon I's nephew, was proclaimed emperor of the Second Empire, as Napoleon III." Gerardogoldenberg (talk) 00:51, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: Your proposed text is identical to the version currently in the article. NiciVampireHeart 01:33, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2019

change "On 6 June 1944 the Allies invaded Normandy and in August they invaded Provence." to "On 6 June 1944, the Allies invaded Normandy and in August they invaded Provence." Gerardogoldenberg (talk) 02:01, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done aboideau^talk 02:08, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2019

change "Between March 1947 and September 1948, the electoral victory of the proponents of independence in Madagascar was followed by a savage repression by the French army (18,000, mostly Senegalese, troops), resulting in some 90,000 deaths." to "Between March 1947 and September 1948, the electoral victory of the proponents of independence in Madagascar was followed by a savage repression by the French army (18,000, mostly Senegalese troops), resulting in some 90,000 deaths." Gerardogoldenberg (talk) 02:19, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: The phrase "18,000, mostly Senegalese, troops" is grammatically correct (because "mostly Senegalese" modifies "18,000 troops," which could stand alone). Removing the comma would neither be grammatically correct nor an improvement. General Ization ^Talk 02:22, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2019

change "Some 200 peaceful civilians demonstrating for independence were killed by (mostly Senegalese) French troops in Casablanca, Morocco, on April 7–8, 1947." to "Some 200 peaceful civilians demonstrating for independence (mostly Senegalese) were killed by French troops in Casablanca, Morocco, on April 7–8, 1947." Gerardogoldenberg (talk) 02:36, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: The change you are proposing fundamentally changes the meaning of the sentence, to say that the civilians were mostly Senegalese rather than the troops. Since the cited source is not available online, I cannot verify that the modified version you propose reflects what the source states or whether that source supports what the article currently says. Please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. General Ization ^Talk 02:52, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

In addition, this source indicates those killed in this event were Moroccan, and were killed by Senegalese troops, as the article currently states. General Ization ^Talk 03:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2019

change "France has several overseas regions across the world, which are organized along different:" to "France has several overseas regions across the world, which are organized as follows:" Gerardogoldenberg (talk) 00:12, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done NiciVampireHeart 00:29, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2019

chnage "Due to its numerous overseas departments and territories scattered across the planet, France possesses the second-largest Exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the world, covering 11,035,000 km2 (4,260,000 mi2), just behind the EEZ of the United States (11,351,000 km2 or 4,383,000 mi2), but ahead of the EEZ of Australia (8,148,250 km2 / 4,111,312 mi2). Its EEZ covers approximately 8% of the total surface of all the EEZs of the world." to "Due to its numerous overseas departments and territories scattered across the planet, France possesses the second-largest Exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the world, covering 11,035,000 km2 (4,260,000 mi2), just behind the EEZ of the United States 11,351,000 km2 (4,383,000 mi2), but ahead of the EEZ of Australia 8,148,250 km2 (4,111,312 mi2). Its EEZ covers approximately 8% of the total surface of all the EEZs of the world. Gerardogoldenberg (talk) 00:21, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done I've reworded the paragraph. NiciVampireHeart 00:35, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

PNRs in Environment Section

Hello. In the environment section, it says "There are nine national parks[111] and 46 natural parks in France...". However, at the end of the same paragraph it says "As of 2014 there are 49 PNRs in France." 46 or 49? Does this need to be corrected? Gerardogoldenberg (talk) 22:52, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

French Overseas Territories In or Out of the European Union?

In the "Region" section it says "Among the 101 departments of France, five (French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Mayotte, and Réunion) are in overseas regions (ROMs) that are also simultaneously overseas departments (DOMs), enjoy exactly the same status as metropolitan departments and are an integral part of the European Union." further down in the "Overseas territories and collectivities" it says "Overseas collectivities and territories form part of the French Republic, but do not form part of the European Union or its fiscal area (with the exception of St. Bartelemy, which seceded from Guadeloupe in 2007)." This seems to be a contradiction, and needs to be corrected.Gerardogoldenberg (talk) 00:18, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Origins of foreign born French

change "8.9% foreign-born[1] (Maghrebis, Africans, Other Europeans, Asians, Turks, American)"

The nationalities of foreign born French citizens seems to be listed by order of prevalence. However the source does not have any figures about this. I suggest deletion, or putting the foreign nationalities in an alphabetical order. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.52.45.31 (talk) 19:55, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Reference to early early hominids and cave art from the upper Paleolithic.

The oldest traces of human life in what is now France date from approximately 1.8 million years ago.[27] Over the ensuing millennia, Humans were confronted by a harsh and variable climate, marked by several glacial eras. Early hominids led a nomadic hunter-gatherer life.

[27] France has a large number of decorated caves from the upper Palaeolithic era, including one of the most famous and best preserved, Lascaux[27] (approximately 18,000 BC)." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thepner (talk • contribs) 14:45, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2019

Hi, French there. The official seal is named "Great Seal of France" but the translation should be "Great Seal of the French Republic" (Grand Sceau de la République Française). This is a translation mistake. Good day ! CocoricoPolynesien (talk) 10:45, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

@CocoricoPolynesien: Thanks for your suggestion! According to France-Diplomatie, the English name is The Great Seal of France so I'm not sure the change is warranted. -- Luk ^talk 15:18, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Oh, okay then ! :) CocoricoPolynesien (talk) 19:02, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 August 2019

The link to France.fr in external links section is not working : "France.fr (in English) Official French tourism website". The good link is https://www.france.fr/en/

Also, the link 398 is not good anmymore : https://www.france.fr/en/institutions-and-values/symbols-french-republic is not existing anymore. Please replace by https://www.france.fr/en/holiday-prep Raphael Belouin (talk) 12:44, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

 Partly done: I have updated the link to france.fr, but reference 398 links to an archive, so still works. The alternative link that you have provided does not contain the same information as the original link. Danski454 (talk) 00:50, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 August 2019

Change to the August highest temperature noted. The current high for the month of August (and the all time high for France) is 45.9C, according to the French state media. That temp was recorded in the Gallargues-le-Montueux region of the Gard departement. <3.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/28/france-on-red-alert-as-heatwave-forecast-to-reach-record-45c Kobentori (talk) 16:10, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: The reading happened in June and has already been added to the article. --Trialpears (talk) 22:55, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

What about this "weird" establishment list?

I don't really understand how come "Baptism of Clovis" is like a key of France establishment. If so, when some Celtic people came in Prehistoric times and replaced the former peoples, could also be considered as part of France establishment. I mean, what is written would have made cense like 100 years ago, when nationalism was important. We know now that we've been thought so many stupid things at school. Clovis wasn't a French king, nor was Charlemagne. They were actually closer to what used to be a Roman emperor, as they dreamt building back the Roman Empire. If you guys want to start with the Treaty of Verdun, why not. Clearly France was far far far away to be France and French people to be French people, but I can admit this could be an official date for what one could call proto-France. By the way, the most very official date for France establishment is 987. Yet this date never appears... — Preceding unsigned comment added by UsernameIsHasBeen (talk • contribs) 14:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2020

china has an out rage in a virus 24.157.36.219 (talk) 18:51, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:28, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2020

Change

The abolition of slavery and male universal suffrage

to

The abolition of slavery and the introduction of male universal suffrage 170.148.69.140 (talk) 09:07, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done Mdaniels5757 (talk) 15:05, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 May 2020

Change <<is a country whose territory consists of metropolitan France in Western Europe and several overseas regions and territories.>> to << is a country that consists of metropolitan France in Western Europe and several overseas regions and territories. Arcatom (talk) 19:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: The original is more accurate and descriptive. The territory of France gives more information then just france.

Problematic concept: "degraded" oceanic climate

The "Climate" subsection under the "Geography" section uses the problematic concept of a "degraded oceanic climate". This concept was introduced relatively recently, in an edit on 10 April 2020 by Météo&Nature, and is not reflected in the accompanying map, which shows most of France simply as having an oceanic climate, without qualification. The "degraded" terminology is not used in the articles on Oceanic climate nor Köppen climate classification.

I have not fixed this problem, because I don't know enough about the climate of France to know what to change it to. (I came to this article to learn about France, not to edit it.) But I ask that someone with knowledge of the French climate should do so. The appropriate fix may not be obvious, but this "degraded oceanic climate" terminology appears to be unsatisfactory. If that terminology is appropriate, then the articles on Oceanic climate and/or Köppen climate classification should be edited to include explanation of the "degraded oceanic climate" concept.

—Syrenka V (talk) 04:34, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Population of France

According to me census data is more reliable than estimates Ktdk (talk) 02:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2020

change "...from the from the Rhine..." to "...from the river Rhine..." on line 2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonovnaslednik (talk • contribs) 2020-10-09 06:59:59 (UTC)

 Done Goldsztajn (talk) 08:20, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Edit request 3.7.2013 Population should be corrected

Estimated total population of France is 66 200 000 (1st January 2012). It should be noted that currently cited INSEE number does not include Mayotte or COM (collectivités d’outre-mer).

Source: http://www.insee.fr/fr/ffc/ipweb/ip1385/ip1385.pdf

From page four: Le champ géographique du bilan démographique de 2011 reste la France métropolitaine et les DOM, mais sans Mayotte, dont la transformation en département d’outre-mer date du 31 mars 2011. En ajoutant les 803 000 habitants des collectivités d’outre-mer et de Mayotte, la population des territoires de la République française au 1 er janvier 2012 est estimée à 66,2 millions d’habitants.

EEZ - contradicting information

The fifth paragraph says that France has the world's largest EEZ. However, under the Geography heading, it says that France has the 2nd largest EEZ.

Sigs

Most of the comments on this page are unsigned, or "autosigned" by a bot. I mean absolutely no disrespect by this question, I ask it entirely in order to cure my own ignorance, and not facetiously. Do authors on frWikipedia not sign their posts? Are maybe all postings autosigned? My French is scarce to none (I can count to ten, orally, if you disregard an atrocious accent, but don't ask me to spell any words. I can spell "un", unless it has diacritical marks, in which case, I don't know). I therefore do not visit the French Wikipedia, so I don't know. rags (talk)

Appeal to edit this page

I would like to edit and contribute to this wikipage about France please.

Vous, mauvais Dieu, vous répandez de la colère.

103.84.36.118 (talk) 19:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Locked??

Any actual good reason why this page is locked or is it just another power grab by the elite? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.11.224.161 (talk) 01:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Emblem

The emblem currently used in this article has been here since revision 912289071 [1]. I could not find an official usage of the said emblem from the last decade, however the Diplomatic emblem of France is currently used in somewhat of an official capacity, for example on French passports and the Elysee. My understanding is that there is no official emblem or COA defined in current French constitution or French law.

I was not able to find a consensus for said change from the diplomatic emblem to the emblem currently listed on the page, and I propose changing the emblem in the infobox back to the diplomatic emblem. -Emphrase (talk) 15:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I agree, the French Wikipedia here fr:France uses the Diplomatic emblem of France, adding to that, the France article on the French wiki is a featured article so I think the diplomatic one (even if not official) should be the one used. PyroFloe (talk) 15:49, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Other langages in France ?

Hello, the France have not one language. Two, three or four others languages : Occitan, Flamand, Arabic, ...

NB : I'am sry for my english, i'am FR. TheAiolosElaosFR (talk) 18:23, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

GDP ranking

Since two years France’s economy is the fifth largest by GDP. Suspiciously, on this page this is never corrected. It is claimed that France is the seventh but no source are used.

Source for France as the fifth largest by GDP: https://www.focus-economics.com/countries/france https://countryeconomy.com/gdp/france — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.166.201.98 (talk) 10:49, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Other than the three 'gold standard' world organisation rankings of all countries by their nominal GDP, which for 2019 and 2020 show France as 7th? List of countries by GDP (nominal)#Lists 'Pull the other one'. David (talk) 20:50, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Over 800 Jews murdered in Kaunas

https://lithuaniatribune.com/families-of-french-jews-killed-in-lithuania-pay-tribute-in-kaunas/ Xx236 (talk) 12:30, 16 April 2021 (UTC) Timeline of deportations of French Jews to death camps says 878.Xx236 (talk) 12:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

came under occupation by the Axis in 1940.

Not exactly.Xx236 (talk) 12:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC) 'In 1940, France was invaded and occupied by Nazi Germany and Italy.' Xx236 (talk) 12:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC) Vichy France 'was an independent ally of Nazi Germany until late 1942.' - so not occupied in 1940.Xx236 (talk) 10:03, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Error in climate section

The climate section of this article states that "• The warm-summer mediterranean climate (Csb) is found in the northern part of Brittany. Summers are warm and dry, while winters are cool and wet. Cities affected by this climate: Belle Île, Saint-Brieuc. ", which is false and in direct contradiction to the adjacent climate map. The northern part of Brittany, alongside the rest of Brittany, has an Oceanic climate (Cfb).

Nonaan (talk) 19:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Edit request, 15 May 2021

Please change "Descartes revitalised Western philosophy, which had been declined after the Greek and Roman eras." to "Descartes was the first Western philosopher since ancient times to attempt to build a philosophical system from the ground up rather than building on the work of predecessors."

The friesian.com source is of questionable reliability, so better sources are preferable. The use of that website should be questioned Wikipedia-wide. A lot of articles cite or list it as an external link because it has pages on a lot of historical and philosophical subjects, but it's the site of a former community college philosophy professor who often "updates" tangentially relevant pages with political polemics (a minor example is at the bottom of the Descartes page). It's really no more reliable than a blog, and except maybe when dealing with philosophy, not even a blog belonging to an expert. 2600:100F:B00E:AD74:E883:ECE2:FDA0:5062 (talk) 17:27, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 18:06, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Updating some information related to climate change

We now have a new article on climate change in France which was expanded recently and which could be linked to in a sentence from here. When looking for the words "climate change", I see it mentioned only once. When looking for "emissions" I see it mentioned 4 times but mostly outdated data from 2009. I suggest we update this information by using info from the sub-article and linking to it. Probably climate change should also be mentioned in the section on climate. I am raising this here first (and have no plans to attempt to make those changes in the article myself) because for other country articles there have been a variety of responses to this kind of request. For some articles, there is an openness to include this, in other cases I had fierce opposition along the lines of "climate change is something of the future, we don't need to mention it here" or "it's just someone's hobby horse topic", and so forth. So I just wanted to gauge the mood here first and give everyone something to ponder over. EMsmile (talk) 12:29, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

"$2.938[9] (7th)" is unclear.

"$2.938[9] (7th)" is how the reader is informed of the GDP of France. It is not at all clear to the majority of readersArctic Gazelle (talk) 17:31, 4 July 2021 (UTC) what this means. How about $2,938,000,000,000[9] (7th)" instead?

 Already done 1 trillion=1000,000,000,000 Dinesh | Talk 05:00, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2021

Change France flag colour to new dark blue colour 88.207.116.72 (talk) 19:41, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:57, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Protected edit request on November 21, 2021

As the editors contesting the flag change do not present any sources to back their counter-point, I suggest this page be locked for at least a few weeks to stop the constant reverts of the flag color. Daran755 (talk) 22:04, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Locked at admin level and at the wrong version™. Mjroots (talk) 13:22, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 25 November 2021

ImChessFan21 (talk) 02:51, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Largoplazo (talk) 03:23, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Flag change

I have noticed that the flag has been changed, which I assume is to do with Macron's unilateral decision to change the blue colour of the flags that are hung on some official buildings. However, it's worth mentioning that the sources do note that not all flags of France have been replaced. M.Bitton (talk) 20:24, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Interesting indeed ... Maybe a funding issue ? --Sapphorain (talk) 21:02, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

@Daran755: I've noticed that most wiki's use the 1958 variant when most sources I have seen state that the color changes uses navy blue, similar to the 1794 flag. I'm no color expert but I feel like the 1958 variant is more darker than the actual flag change. I only restored the lighter version temporarily as I'm considering to change it back if the situation with the flag is more clearer. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 14:07, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

The new flag is no more official than the old and no instructions have been given to change all the official flags. The change has been described by the Élysée as an incentive (apparently, Macron's entourage has no desire to give the image of a president who touches the deep symbols of the country). M.Bitton (talk) 14:37, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

@Britannicus the Scot: The situation of the flag is not as simple as it looks. Whether we keep the old known flag or adopt the new one is something that needs to be discussed. M.Bitton (talk) 15:50, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

@Daran755: Apart from reverting others, do you anything of value to add to this discussion? M.Bitton (talk) 16:11, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

@M.Bitton: Do we need to discuss the fact that Joe Biden became president in order to update his page? What do you need to discuss other than the fact that the change is official? Even if some buildings might still be using the lighter shade version as the change is recent, that doesnt negate the fact that the official flag is now using the navy blue color, as per the Elysee statement. Refer to the French wikipedia page, or French media that confirmed the change of flag before starting a stupid revert war. Daran755 (talk) 16:19, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

You're comparing oranges to apples. As I explained, the new flag is no more official than the old one (the one that is commonly used). What someone managed to impose on the French Wikipedia (through an edit war) is irrelevant. M.Bitton (talk) 16:27, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

@Daran755: According to your sources, the flag was changed last year yet no one changed the flag until recently. Besides, the variant you want to use isn't even the correct version as the French Wikipedia has more accurate shades as seen but that doesn't even matter as the French government hasn't made any official shades as of November 2021. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 16:33, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

@SuperSkaterDude45 Can you actually read French? Do you know how France works? Did Valérie Giscard d’Estaing hold a vote or make a big announcement on TV when he changed the flag to a lighter shade version? The answer is no, he did the same way that Macron is now doing. The change is recent because it was recently confirmed by the French presidency that they changed the shade of the flag, making the change official, that’s kind of how it works! Daran75 (talk) 16:40, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

You're still not addressing any of the issues that have been highlighted. As for the French wiki, have a look at the discussion that's taking place there. M.Bitton (talk) 16:43, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

I believe that as the French wiki decides to change the flag, then the English wiki should too. similarly, the Flag of France page puts the darker variant over the lighter one, where it used to be the other way around. if Macron loses the election and the victor chooses to keep the flag lighter, then that should be that. Spaceexplorerer ᐵ ^(talk) 00:34, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

I fully agree with you, but some people are just too keen on gatekeeping the lighter flag for some reason... Daran755(talk) 13:16, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

French Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and each language's Wikipedia has its own guidelines. So, for example, when considering the notability of a French person, company, or tourist attraction, we make our own determination, we don't go by whether French Wikipedia has affirmed their notability. French Wikipedia is relevant here only insofar as individual points raised or information provided in the discussion there may be equally valid and useful to the discussion here. Largoplazo (talk) 13:27, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

COMMENT No opinion on the flag, but if I consider that edit warring is occurring, I will be taking administrative action, be it locking the article, blocking editors, or both. You have been warned. Mjroots (talk) 18:52, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

References

Compromise suggestion

The only thing that is clear about the shades of colour on the flag is that there is no right or wrong version. There was evidently a tacit but stable position position for many decades with dark shades, then for the last 40 years there was a no less tacit but widespread acceptance of lighter colours, now we know that one very influential Frenchman prefers the darker version, but France is not a dictatorship and Macron's shift of opinion/usage is not legally definitive (but neither is custom over the last 40 years).

It is not the place of Wikipedia to take a stand on such a debate: our purpose is to produce a stable and informative encyclopaedia. Stability is best achieved by meeting the expectations of all editors, and that goal (and neutrality in the debate) is probably best served by having both flags in the infobox. Template:infobox country allows it. Is there any good reason not to? Kevin McE (talk) 12:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

@Kevin McE: I personally think having two flags would look a bit messy, I still think we should display the version that is used by the government and by the presidency, if the darker version is no more official than the ligher version, the lighter version is not more official than the darker one either, we might as we display the one that is used internationally now. Eventually the lighter blue flags will be replaced across the country following that decision. User:Daran755 22:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

we might as well display the one that is used internationally now Which one would that be (assuming you have a reliable source to back your claim)? M.Bitton (talk) 22:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

(after edit conflict) Of course you are entitled to your opinion as to what might look messy, but the community has obviously decided that the idea of having two flags is not out of the question for aesthetic reasons, as the template allows it. Have you trialled it, or are you just assuming that you won't like the look?

On what evidence do you claim that the darker version is used by the French Government? I see three representations of the flag on the first page of www.gouvernement.fr/en, all of which are light blue; 4 of the 6 at homepage of www.elysee.fr/en (website of the Presidency) are . As regards international use, I'm not sure what you mean by that, but uk.ambafrance.org (French consulate), the list of member nations at un.org, the country profile at https://european-union.europa.eu, and the US embassy in Paris (fr.usembassy.gov) all use the lighter colours. You seem to be attributing the full force of law to one informal action of the president, but that is not how law works in a parliamentary democracy. Perhaps you would like to present your evidence for the claim that the darker version is predominantly used by either the government or the presidency, or the international community.

If it becomes the case that the darker version replaces the lighter one "across the country", and becomes dominant as the lighter one has been in recent years, then the decision to relegate the prominence of the lighter one here can (and should) be made here, but to claim now that that will happen is WP:CRYSTAL. Macron might not be president in 6 months, and such a change is likely to take much longer than that. Kevin McE (talk) 23:11, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

The darker blue flag is displayed at the Elysee, within French government ministry buildings, displayed behind ministers when giving a speech, and used at international summits by the Presidency.

Now I would be interested to know where you have learned that France is a parliamentary democracy? Because I'm pretty sure it's a semi-presidential democracy, in which most powers reside in the hands of the President. Really seems like you don't know much about France to be honest. The websites you refer to are using the darker blue version like here: https://www.gouvernement.fr/en/the-tricolour-flag // the lighter blue picture you see on the Elysee website is from Macron's official portrait which was taken in 2017, well before the change. I didnt know also that the U.S. embassy in Paris decided which flag is the official flag of France. Unless you have real arguments, you might as well sit this one out. Nor the UN or the EU decide which flag is the French flag either by the way. Speculating on the next election is also irrelevant. Daran755 (talk) 9:05, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

You are the one who said, "we might as we display the one that is used internationally now." I have provided evidence as to which flag is being used internationally now. Where is your evidence for international use of the darker version? By what principle of Wikipedia do you think we should anticipate popular acceptance? And you haven't given any reason why your assumption about what might look messy should trump the long term principle in the template that display of two flags can be considered. Kevin McE (talk) 11:47, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Alternate proposal

Flag conforming to the official definition of the flag of France but with shades of blue and red not found in any actual French flag

I propose (tongue-in-cheek, of course) that we display this. Then it will be equally correct regardless of which set of shades a given president is requiring at a given moment. After all, since the shade isn't official, it doesn't matter which shades we use in our version of it as long as it conforms to those specifications that are official (bleu, blanc, rouge).

As far as I can tell, the only pronouncement that's more specific than this is the latest declaration that has been issued by a sitting president. So we can go by mine, or we can go by that. If we go by whichever version happens to be flying in front of such-and-such buildings, that's original research, isn't it?

For those reasons, I propose that either we go with my version or with the latest version requested by a sitting president. I, of course, will find it entertaining if anyone votes for the former of these two. Largoplazo (talk) 13:48, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

It seems that the darker blue variant is at least some what used by government and the president it seems sensible to just put both flags to show that both flags are being used in some capacity. Having only one gives the impression that only the lighter blue variant is the one being used officially by government and the president. However if for stylistic reasons only one can be chosen I agree let’s just use the darker variant by the current sitting president as that’s more relevant. Also something that should be noted I’m pretty sure google changed the flag when you search France the navy blue flag shows up. Black roses124 (talk) 23:05, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 5 December 2021

The flag of France has changed , you see it has changed from bright blue to navy blue Thank you 2A00:23C8:A720:9200:B02C:9E91:B68:DDA9 (talk) 20:43, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done This is already being discussed above. Feel free to contribute to that discussion. Largoplazo (talk) 23:00, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 5 December 2021

The shade of blue on the French flag has changed to a darker one. Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59283134 Gamerknowitall (talk) 20:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done This is already being discussed above. Feel free to contribute to that discussion. Largoplazo (talk) 23:01, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of "Template:Largest cities of France"

Template:Largest cities of France has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 10:10, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Flag

France changed the flag by making the blue darker. 109.166.129.9 (talk) 19:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

France did not. For more details, see the existing discussion above. Largoplazo (talk) 20:27, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Unbalanced

Greetings,

I am just short of tagging society section with Template:Unbalanced.

The section about French society, boasts about status of women in France. Good is good no issues. But I wish to apply principle of 'where content boasts about some fundamentals then it need to be balanced by mentioning unexpected contrast, if any. If women in France still face issues like intimate partner violence/ or some other problem then that should get mention in the article, IMHO.

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 08:29, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

The article lists things which are remarkable, things which set a country (in this case France) apart from most other countries. Your supposed unbalance and needed addition on the other hand is something that sadly happens in every single country in the world, and thus doesn´t need adding. Fram (talk) 20:38, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Protected edit requests

May we have the name King Philip Augustus changed to King Philip II & also the phrase "...of the World War II" to "...of World War II"? -- GoodDay (talk) 16:09, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

 Partly done the "of the" part is done. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:47, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

But the bio article is Philip II of France. -- GoodDay (talk) 17:59, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

@GoodDay: I'm not declining this (why it is still answered=no) - just don't have time to dig through the nature of the protection dispute to see if that section is part of it or not right now. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:06, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done (not part of the edit war, which seems to be mostly about flags). — xaosflux ^Talk 12:29, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: - the FP is entirely down to the flag dispute, which doesn't seem solvable yet. Am going to raise this at WP:AN. Mjroots (talk) 17:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I've opened an RFC. Hopefully we can have a temporary solution to the full protection, but in the long term we need a consensus to point at. BilledMammal (talk) 22:51, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 December 2021

The flag wich we can see on the page "France" is the old flag. On the new french flag, there is a dark blue instead the skyblue.

The new flag is this :

Drapeau

Modificateur651 (talk) 15:00, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. See#Protection level reduced. Signed, I Am Chaos (talk) 16:53, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

An ongoing discussion about whether to do this has been going on for days, above at #RFC regarding the flag, preceded by another two-week discussion at #Flag change. Largoplazo (talk) 18:26, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Anonymous-raccoon.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:45, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Protection level reduced

I've reduced the protection level to extended confirmed, per my suggestion at WP:AN and support for that move. I've also edit the page notice to include a notice warning that altering the flag without consensus will render the editor liable to a block. There is also a hidden note warning editors not to change the flag, so all bases are covered. If this proves to be effective, and the RFC above produces a consensus, then in the longer term, protection can be reduced to semi-protection. If it doesn't, then the article can always be returned to full protection. Mjroots (talk) 04:49, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

@Mjroots: now that there is a consensus on the flag, is it appropriate to reduce the protection level further? BilledMammal (talk) 04:34, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done Mjroots (talk) 06:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mjroots: Do you happen to know why Flag A has been replaced? Best, M.Bitton (talk) 17:06, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

The file "Flag of France.svg" was updated, as the consensus is that B is the "Flag of France". I've been going through trying to correct the few cases where A is the intended flag, but there are a lot of articles to check, and I'm not bothering with non-article space. BilledMammal (talk) 17:20, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Overwriting the file wasn't part of the RfC (which now looks confusing, as it discusses two flags that look the same). M.Bitton (talk) 17:24, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I think it is part of the question; if the consensus was that the flag of France is B, then the file "Flag of France.svg" should be updated, both to implement the change, and to prevent editors accidentally using the wrong flag. BilledMammal (talk) 17:28, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Maybe MSGJ would like to comment. Mjroots (talk) 17:30, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

It most definitely wasn't part of the RfC which was about which flag to use in the wp articles and not which is the correct "flag of France" (we're in no position to make such a decision).M.Bitton (talk) 17:34, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

The question was "Which flag should be used as the flag of France, including on this article?" The file would appear to be part of that. BilledMammal (talk) 17:37, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Overwriting the file was not discussed, that's a fact. M.Bitton (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

If we reverted to the lighter one, we should add a disclaimer like the one that was added on the file of the Canadian flag. Here is an example:

SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 09:54, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

RFC regarding the flag (deuxième partie)

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

This was discussed very recently at Talk:France#RFC regarding the flag which decided upon the "navy blue" flag (see that discussion for further information), and I see no reason to start it all off again. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

---

"Marian Blue" flag; A

"Navy Blue" flag; B

Do we think we should revert to the A shade and add a disclaimer similar to the disclaimer that was added on the file of the Canadian flag? SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 08:25, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

• Procedural close – Wasn't this just decided three days ago, after an Rfc that ran for a month? Mathglot (talk) 09:35, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
  • @Mathglot: I missed the RFC. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 09:52, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edit equest on 6 December 2022

The emblem of France is showing the unofficial emblem and needs to be changed to either one. -->

Official arms of France

Official coat of arms of France

The emblem on the Wikipedia page is showing the diplomatic emblem. I need to change the emblem to the one on the right and redirect the link to the page.SaberingSidewinder (talk) 17:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I'm the editor who previously changed the emblem from the republican emblem (sorry if this terminology is incorrect) that you are requesting to the diplomatic emblem (it was discussed here). It was because at the time:

1. As far as I could find there was no law in force in France that designated the republican emblem as the official emblem of France
2. The diplomatic emblem was the only one in use by the French national government in an official capacity
3. On French Wikipedia the diplomatic emblem is used

Have these changed in the meantime, or can you elaborate on why this article should use the republican emblem instead? -Emphrase (talk) 13:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello ! Indeed, France has no official emblem, but the emblem shown by this Wikipedia is used on the main cover of our passports. I think it is correct to use this one. The emblem proposed by SaberingSidewinder is the emblem of the President of the Fifth French Republic (not present on the English Wikipedia but present on the French Wikipedia). -Cyygma (talk) 14:47, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2022

I think you should add napoleonic era in establishment box 2603:800C:3400:2AFB:587E:27E3:7EC3:3C74 (talk) 06:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --Ferien (talk) 12:26, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

roman empire

today we are learning about france and we need help finding out stuff so if you can help us say who dat? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.9.209.118 (talk) 18:36, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi there. On Wikipedia, an article talk page like this is only for the purpose of commenting on the state of the associated article and discussing improvements to it, not for general discussion or asking questions. However, there is a Wikipedia:Reference desk that you can visit to try to get information that you're looking for. Largoplazo (talk) 21:35, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

RFC regarding the flag

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

There is consensus that option B, the "navy blue" flag, should be generally used. There is also consensus that, when the flag itself is discussed in the article, both flags should be used. There is no consensus on how to present both flags in such articles. (non-admin closure) Tol (talk | contribs) @ 04:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

---

"Marian Blue" flag; A

"Navy Blue" flag; B

Which flag should be used as the flag of France, including on this article? If both, please specify which flag should be used in circumstances where both is not possible.
22:49, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Survey

• B. To the best of my knowledge, there is no PAG on this, and the arguments will be mostly of a pragmatic nature. So here goes. French law does not define the specific tone of the French flag. The French Constitution only provides that the flag is blue, white and red. Dark blue has a long-standing history, stretching from the First Republic to the early years of the Fifth Republic, including Free France. What Macron has done is simply reverting to the pre-1974 practice of using dark blue, and there is every indication that this practice will progressively spread. I'm not sure what exactly we would be waiting for by choosing A. JBchrch talk 23:58, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

  Could I ask @JBchrch: to clarify what he means by 'PAG' here? I suspect I will not be the only one reading this who does not recognise the abbreviation. Kevin McE (talk) 18:13, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

  @Kevin McE Policies and guidelines (WP:PAG). And yes, I do use abbreviations to show that I'm smart. JBchrch talk 18:16, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

• Should use panton colors as we do with most countries = "PANTONE “Reflex Blue” and PANTONE “Red 032”, or RGB (0,85,164) and (239,65,53), or CMYK (100,73,0,2) and (0,90,86,0) as outlined by Valéry Giscard d’Estaing."Moxy- 01:45, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

  @Moxy I think it would be useful if you clarified why you think we should follow Giscard and not Macron. JBchrch talk 01:49, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

  Because we have no panton colors for it....as seen above all just guess work of the shade.Moxy- 01:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

  To clarify, you are !voting for A, Marian Blue? BilledMammal (talk) 01:54, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

  Yes... use the registered colours for the national insignia.... not the one used by government officials.Moxy- 02:16, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

  I don't plan on bludgeoning the conversation, but I will just note that we have many articles using the historical navy version, without the need for a pantone code. JBchrch talk 02:02, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

  Pantone colors should be used where every possible.We should not be guessing what shade are used in modern flags.Moxy- 02:24, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

• A. Visually, I think this is what most people are familiar with. I saw the darker blue and was thinking it was the flag for another country. Deathlibrarian (talk) 05:35, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

  I don't think it is that confusing since France is the only country to use a vertical tricolour design with these colours. Even if the colours are darker, the flag of France is not going to be mistaken with the flag of another country. Unlike Chad and Romania, for instance. In addition, using the "B" flag will prevent people from mistaking the flag of France with the flag of the Madriz Department (I'm aware that this scenario does not concern many people outside Nicaragua).Le Braddock (talk) 21:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  It is not so much an issue of readers thinking that it is the flag of another nation as not recognising that it is France's. It should not (according to WP:FLAG) be the case, but the flag is very often shown on Wikipedia, especially in templates, without the country name. In such cases, it still communucates useful information to the reader if the flag is one they recognise, but not if they don't. Many readers will recognise both, but for those who don't (such as Deathlibrarian), the colours in option A are far more likely to be recognised, and therefore flag A will be informative while flag B is not. People will only confidently know that there is no other country with colour combination B if they believe that they know every national flag in the world. Kevin McE (talk) 15:50, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

  I understand what you are saying. But people will gradually get used to it (it's not a big change after all). The goal of the website is also to use the colours most similar to the flags used by the french government. There will always be confusion if the digital flag does not correspond to the real ones.Le Braddock (talk) 17:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

  I do not believe that that is at all the goal of the website. We have no mandate to act on behalf of the government of France. We use the flag that will be recognised as the flag of France. Both A and B are genuine and correct representations of the current flag of France, but A is the variant most likely to be recognised as such by most people. Of course if it becomes the case that A by law no longer fills the definition our practice must change (familiarity does not justify error), but that is not where we are. If Macron's wish, that the darker colours become more widely accepted and recognised, comes to pass, then we respond and follow that (which is why I have said we should keep it under review), but it is not the place of Wikipedia to drive for change on Macron's behalf. Kevin McE (talk) 00:02, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

  So, according to you, we should wait until the B flag becomes more popular (if it ever gets popular) to use it on the wikipedia page ?Le Braddock (talk) 21:46, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

  That depends on which Wikipedia page you mean. I have already !voted (21 Dec, below) both in relation to this page and Flag of France. In regard to other pages, where the flag usually is present via a template, then absolutely "Yes", unless or until it ceases to be legally correct before that, because there is little point in trying to communicate the concept of France by using a poorly recognised representation of France. I have already described it as a vexillological parallel to WP:COMMONNAME; surprising the reader is not our goal, and neither is pushing for the change that a politician might want. Kevin McE (talk) 15:22, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

• A or B - Since both exist. GoodDay (talk) 05:44, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
• A at least until there's a good source for Macron's blue. The color chosen here looks wrong to me, and doesn't match the 000080 html color Navy Blue, and I can't see where it came from. Dicklyon (talk) 07:09, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
• B. Although I think either is fine and using A shouldn't be an issue, if we have to use one over the other go with B as it seems to be the one the French government prefers. There shouldn't be an issue using A outside the infobox. --Spekkios (talk) 20:35, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
• A for now in most places (which essentially means in the templates), but it seems it should be kept under review. Other than in the article about the flag and discussion of symbols in this article here, the purpose of flags in articles is to indicate France, not to inform about the flag, so until and unless the darker form becomes the image that people 'normally' associate with France, the familiar, paler ("Marian") version does that more effectively. It may well be that in a fairly short time this will no longer be the case. However, see my second !vote below. Kevin McE (talk) 18:39, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
• Both in this article and at Flag of France (but not vertically separated with no space between them as in the Option C below). At this time of a split, these are the two places that people might look to see what is correct, and it is not the place of Wikipedia to suggest that one is right and the other is wrong. Both are current, in official use, and they are equally the flag of France, so neither should be omitted at those key locations. Kevin McE (talk) 18:39, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
• Both at Flag of France and anywhere else the precise design or colours are discussed, A everywhere else until at least there are reliable sources indicating what the exact shade of navy blue is. Thryduulf (talk) 16:51, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
• A or Both The second design, hereafter labeled B, is uncommon and, should I say, deprecated. Using it in the article to portray the current flag of France would mean to other French people that the article is outdated if they are observant, or as for those who are not observant, they may notice the darker tones, but might think of it as an amateur graphic being used rather than an official graphic of the flag. The most B should appear in the article would be to be used to teach people about the difference between what the flag of France was versus what it is now under the history section. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 19:27, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

  It seems Encyclopaedia Britannica uses the darker tones, so I'm skeptical of the argument that they would look amateurish. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:43, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

  odd the official source uses the other one.Moxy- 22:25, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

  In this case, it's Encyclopedia Britannica that looks amateurish. It's been using that flag since May 2020 (before Macron's flag which appeared on July 2020) and a very odd looking one before that. M.Bitton (talk) 13:25, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

• Both where the flag itself is being discussed. No opinion about what to do in other places. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:43, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
• B The article on the flag of France in French Wikipedia says that at least since the Second Empire, approximately 1852, use of a dark and gloomy blue seems to have been established (un bleu sombre) - a navy blue near midnight blue - which would correspond to the B colour scheme. While there is no law defining the flag's colour tones, France's national navy has been publishing an album of flags since 1858, and there, the dark navy blue colour tone was and is used. The current version of the album, published by France's Naval Hydrographic and Oceanographic Service, defines the flag's blue as Pantone 282 C and the red as Pantone 186 C - which also match the B scheme. This classic colour scheme was used at least from 1852 till 1974, i.e. for 122 years, significantly longer than the lighter colours introduced by Giscard d'Estaing in 1974. Alternatively, we could display the B colour scheme with an option for the reader to switch to the A colours. --K1812 (talk) 20:29, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

  Source for color ....are we to use " dark navy blue colour tone" what Pantone are we to guess at?Moxy- 22:18, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

  We don't need to guess what colour to use. The album of flags which is published by France's Naval Hydrographic and Oceanographic Service clearly states that Pantone 282 C should be used for the flag of France. --K1812 (talk) 09:19, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

  The only flag I can find on shom.fr is very much not navy blue. Do you have a link to this album? Does it claim to describe the national/state flag rather than (as seems likely in that context) a naval ensign? Does this album specify equal width stripes or the visual effect 30:33:37 (naval) spacing? When was this album published? If more than a few months ago, then it was clearly not trying to describe normal usage. Kevin McE (talk) 11:47, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

  Before i say anything else, i must correct myself. I found the album on-line, the download, however, is not for free. One can download an excerpt of the album for free. Luckily for our case, that excerpt shows the flag of France, and it says that the flag's blue is approximately - and not exactly - Pantone 282 C. The album seems to show a naval flag as well as the national flag. The website gives 08/04/2021 as date, which should be 8 April 2021. This is the link to the free excerpt:

  https://diffusion.shom.fr/pro/downloadable/download/sample/sample_id/73/

  The page for the album is

  https://diffusion.shom.fr/pro/album-des-pavillons-nationaux-et-marques-distinctives.html

  I also found the web site of the Société Française de Vexillologie which has additional information on the French flag (in French):

  https://drapeaux-sfv.org/vexillologie/actualites/article/a-propos-du-bleu-du-drapeau-tricolore

  --K1812 (talk) 12:57, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

  The website gives 08/04/2021 as date It's been saying the same thing since 2019 (long before Macron's flag). M.Bitton (talk) 13:25, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

  That it has said the same thing since 2019 shows that it is not claiming that there has been a change. The SVF article also says that the army uses Pantone 294U (and other, paler, options).

  And therein lies our problem: neither is wrong, both (alongside innumerable other shade combinations, as Largoplazo points out above) are equally right. So we are choosing on the grounds of usage, not legislation. I don't know how long it took the paler version to gain pre-eminence after d'Estaing expressed his preference, probably quite some time (I certainly remember the dark blue in the French classroom at school in the late 70s), but we should not be either promoting or pre-empting the rollout of the newly favoured dark shades that Macron seems to like. We should be operating a flag equivalent of COMMONNAME, and so while it should be kept under review, I think it is premature to go for the dark shades for now. Kevin McE (talk) 14:02, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

• B According to various news reports The flag color was changed to the more navy blue. While this is a subtle change the darker navy color would be more inline with the countries official stance. Tepkunset (talk) 15:36, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

  Reading the article you reference reveals that it is not as cut and dried as "the flag color was changed": "“No communication was made on this change of colour, no instructions were given to change or not all the official flags, the Élysée Palace affirms that the approach is an incentive." Kevin McE (talk) 22:31, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

• B. We don't decide what flag a country use, we only show what they do use. Same as the current flag on Afghanistan's page.--Aréat (talk) 21:20, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
• B – per most recent usage, as well as the long history of usage of darker blue as explained by K1812, including the links he provided. Mathglot (talk) 21:48, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
• Both → A. Per WP:NPOV, display both flags here and at Flag of France, together with a footnote explaining their current situation. A, the most commonly used flag, in articles where it's impractical to display both. Please see this discussion for more info. M.Bitton (talk) 22:51, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
• B Since it is the most prevalent historically and is used by the current government. -- Maykii (talk) 17:52, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
• B The old (or new) flag with dark colors is visible at every speech behind President Macron or his Prime Minister, in addition, it is also seen on several official buildings of the French government and on monuments since 2020.Therefore, I think it would be more appropriate for the dark flag to be displayed as the main flag and for the light flag to be taken as the variance. Le Braddock (talk) 23:08, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
• A with footnote, and keep under review. My opinion is both are in widespread use, and no official declaration has been made about phasing out the Marian Blue version, so I think it is too soon to make the jump. Right now, gouvernement.fr is using   #000090 Blue, which is close to Option A. I think this is very different to the Afghanistan situation because the IRA and IEA have completely different designs, while in France, the shade of blue seem to be a matter of personal choice as long as it’s "blue, white, red" according to the constitution, and there is no written law or decree that specifies an official shade. Without such law or decree, the debate over which of the sixty-six shades of blue (i.e. the blue value between 84 to 149 out of 255) is correct will continue without a clear answer. --Minoa (talk) 20:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
• B where speaking of current flag since Navy blue was stated as official. (e.g. mentioned by BBC) Where an article is showing or speaking of prior flag, then show that one. Cheers Markbassett (talk) 04:55, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

  Be wary of the words you use. 'Official' is a very strong word for your example - a news channel only reports on happenings. If it was official, Macron or a government employee would have stated this much. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 14:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

• B or both This flag has the original colours of the french tricolour.Saswiki3 (talk) 17:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
• B The variant of the flag in widespread use by the French government should be the version used. In the article on the flag of France both variants should be discussed. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 17:16, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

Option C

@BilledMammal: Is there a particular reason why you're not offering the community the option to select both (see the example on the right and the above discussion where this has been suggested as a compromise)? M.Bitton (talk) 23:30, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I went ahead and added the option. I also reworded the RfC statement to make it brief and neutral (I hope you don't mind). I'm not sure about about the "including on this article" part as that is usually implied. M.Bitton (talk) 23:47, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but I've reverted it back. I omitted the option of both because that option isn't viable for most articles where the flag is used, and because introducing a third option to a potentially contentious RFC will make it much more difficult to come to a consensus. Of course, the absence of the explicit option won't prevent editors from selecting it, though I hope if they do they also select a single flag to use in articles where both cannot be used. I also believe the statement complies with WP:RFCBRIEF and WP:RFCNEUTRAL. BilledMammal (talk) 00:09, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

1) The context is that the ... is suggestive and clearly non neutral. The context (for those who not are familiar with the subject) is covered in the above discussions. 2) This is a special case which deserves to be treated as such. 3) Since its absence won't prevent the editors from selecting it, why not offer it as an option and let the case be put to bed once and for all? M.Bitton (talk) 00:21, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Added both as an option, with a request to specify which in cases where both is not possible. BilledMammal (talk) 00:37, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

I agree that the broader context should be omitted from the RfC question per RFCBRIEF. I would personally not include this third choice, but I don't have strong views about it. JBchrch talk 00:28, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Removed, given there seems to be a consensus against it, though I continue to believe it is neutral and not suggestive in either direction - although as I have no opinion on this RFC beyond wanting the full protection removed, I could easily be mistaken. BilledMammal (talk) 00:33, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

If you want the full protection removed, then you must allow everyone to have their say (even if you don't agree with the third option or think it's unnecessary). Otherwise, we'll end up dealing with the same issue again as soon as the protection is lifted. BTW, there is nothing in the guidelines that prevents us from using the switcher template (which works everywhere) for the flag. M.Bitton (talk) 00:39, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

RFC's are not required to include every possible option, such as the flag proposed by User:Largoplazo above, and it is recommended to keep the options limited in order to aid in coming to a consensus - and omitting options doesn't prevent editors from "having their say" and supporting them.

I will mention that the switcher template won't work everywhere - for example, flag icons. However, as I said above, I've already added the option to the RFC. BilledMammal (talk) 00:46, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

I missed your comment about the fact that you already added the mention of both. Fair point about the icons (though, that hasn't been discussed and being so small, I doubt anyone would notice). I wouldn't worry about mentioning the switcher template since the compromise suggested by Kevin McE doesn't refer to it. M.Bitton (talk) 01:06, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Maybe I should be complemented by you thinking that something not referred to by me does not merit mention by anyone else, but mainly I would warn that you are investing more importance in my comment than I would. Kevin McE (talk) 18:55, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Editors are obviously free to mention whatever they want, but when it comes to formulating the RfC, adding what hasn't been discussed or suggested prior to its start (the switcher, the icons, etc.) would create more confusion than necessary. M.Bitton (talk) 00:54, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

@M.Bitton: - Protection level has been lowered, with clear warnings aplenty of the consequences of changing the flag. Obviously, if consensus is reached here to change, then that can be done without fear of penalty. Mjroots (talk) 05:03, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Does the shade really matter that much? If so, then (if anybody knows how) put in a mechanism that can change it every 24 hrs. GoodDay (talk) 05:47, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Just saying: This is technically possible and easy to implement ({{#ifexpr:{{CURRENTDAY}} mod 2|[[File:Flag of France.svg]]|[[File:Flag of France (1794–1815, 1830–1958).svg]]}} results in today) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:05, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Thinking outside the box: How about uploading "File:Flag of France.gif", which fades between the two versions every 10 seconds? --Minoa (talk) 20:07, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Post-close discussion

@Tol I'm not familiar with Wikipedia so I don't know if it's here that I shall reply.

"There is no consensus on how to present both flags in such articles." Why not just use this one (without the green bar though): c:File:Flag_of_France_(colour_shade_comparison)_063712.svg Esteban Outeiral Dias (talk) 12:09, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

@Esteban Outeiral Dias: That would probably be an acceptable method of presenting both flags, as it demonstrates the color difference, and both flags have the same content other than color. I saw consensus for presenting both flags when the flag itself is discussed, but I didn't see consensus for specifically using an image like this one to do so. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 14:55, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 May 2022

"(French: République française[14])" should be "(French: République française)[14]" 84.196.39.52 (talk) 18:50, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done. Per MOS:CITEPUNCT: Where a footnote applies only to material within parentheses, the ref tags belong just before the closing parenthesis. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 20:01, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2022

The total GDP values for both PPP and Nominal should be changed from $3,667 trillion to $3.667 trillion and from $2,936 trillion to $2.936 trillion respectively. As1999610 (talk) 17:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: This article is written in British English where they use commas for decimals. DarthFlappy 19:11, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

That's incorrect. Thousands separators are governed by MOS:DIGITS and decimal points by MOS:DECIMAL, irrespective of the language variety in use. I'm going to make the change. Largoplazo (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done Largoplazo (talk) 20:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Oops, my bad. DarthFlappy 21:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Misreading of religious demographics in infobox

The infobox regard religious demographics is wrong about the year. The religious demographics there is from a 2016 survey not 2022.CycoMa1 (talk) 03:21, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2022

In this phrase:

More recently, the middle of the 20th century, Maurice...

Please add "in" before "the middle". The sentence works fine with a prepositional phrase between the commas, but without a preposition, it doesn't sound right. 49.198.51.54 (talk) 20:12, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:23, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

redundancy/mistake in the economy section

"As of 2011, the three largest financial institutions cooperatively owned by their customers were French: Crédit Agricole, Groupe Caisse D'Epargne, and Groupe Caisse D'Epargne." groupe caisse d'epargne is listed twice, and i dont think theyre both different ones because they both link to the same thing 41.69.137.67 (talk) 16:21, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@41.69.137.67 googled it, third one is supposed to be Crédit Mutuel 41.69.137.67 (talk) 16:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@41.69.137.67 by google of course i meant to the reference link im not using google i pinky promise 😊 41.69.137.67 (talk) 16:27, 15 August 2022 (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:

• Siège de l'AFP 13 place de la Bourse Paris.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:36, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

"Belle France" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Belle France and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 3#Belle France until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 21:34, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

"Frqnce" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Frqnce and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 3#Frqnce until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 21:36, 3 December 2022 (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:

• Millau Viaduct, France (39307678014).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:52, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Destructive shortings

• A list of the biggest cities is a classical element of each main article on any country.
• The map of regions & departments is a compact information on the geographic administrative structure of France. Without it, the reading visitors need a lot of research and own evaluation to get it. This way, this map saves space and time. And as French people understand the geography of their country by the departments, as a foreigner you have to know the departments to understand French people.--Ulamm (talk) 09:52, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ulamm:, thanks for your comments about the article. The list of cities is already there; see section § Major cities. While there isn't a map of every department, there is already a map of the regions, in section § Regions; anyone interested in going deeper, can click the "Further" link to the article Departments of France.

I'm not sure what you meant to say for the section header "Destructive shortings", as it doesn't mean anything in English; mais si vous me le dites en francais ce que vous avez voulu dire par cela, je le mettrai dans un bon anglais, si vous le voulez. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 10:42, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Ich sehe gerade, dass du deutscher, u. nicht Franzose bist; du kannst mir es auf deutsch schreiben, es ist mir egal; danke im Voraus. Mathglot (talk) 10:51, 26 December 2022 (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:

• France-Constituent-Lands.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:52, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Reference to Exclusive Economic Zone uses wrong numbers

• What I think should be changed: In the "Location and Borders" subsection of the "Geography" section, the last paragraph claims France's Exclusive Economic Zone amounts to 11,035,000 square kilometers, the second most in the world. This should be changed to 11,691,000 square kilometers, the most in the world.

• Why it should be changed: The number currently in the article is wrong, and 11,691,000 square kilometers is used in multiple other wikipedia articles, notably in "Exclusive economic zone".

• References supporting the possible change:

Rotciv0 (talk) 23:15, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

References

Inclined to reject, unlikely reliable source. -Lemonaka‎ 13:38, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. This source looks to be a non-peer reviewed paper internal to a private organization. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:42, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Request to remove CFP Franc from currencies

CFP Franc is not accepted in mainland France, so it's misleading to say it's a currency of France. It should be included as a footnote explaining that it is only used in the overseas territories instead. Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 02:16, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

France is more than mainland France, as noted in the first couple of sentences of this page. There are already footnotes about the geographic usage. CMD (talk) 02:25, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

We agree. That's why the currency can't be stated as being used in France because it is not used in all of France. It should be a footnote. Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 02:31, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

The Euro is also not used in all of France. CMD (talk) 02:34, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Neither is the Eusko, but according to this logic it needs to be front and center on the infobox. Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 02:37, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm not following exactly what you mean as I was replying to your statement, but for the record the Eusko is a local scrip rather than an official currency. CMD (talk) 02:50, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

I was just pointing out that other currencies are used in France as well, mainland France in the Eusko example. Other examples are the US dollar in Saint Martin and Canadian dollar in Saint Pierre and Miquelon, both of which are official currencies that are in de facto use in other areas of France.

The point I'm trying to make is that there are many currencies used in France, officially and unofficially. However, the main currency that is used by >95% of the population is the Euro. Isn't it kind of strange to point out only one of the minor currencies rather than all of them? Wkpdsrnm2023 (talk) 03:16, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

You ask that as though it were an arbitrary choice. The CFP differs from the others in that it's a currency issued by France. Largoplazo (talk) 21:06, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 March 2023

In the introduction it is said :

Inhabited since the Palaeolithic era, the territory of Metropolitan France was settled by Celtic tribes known as Gauls during the Iron Age.

The word Paleolithic here is linked to the "Upper Paleolithic" article

Please change the first sentence with:

Inhabited since the Lower Palaeolithic era, the territory of Metropolitan France was settled...

In accordance with the Historical Section of the same article

Thank you ! DocNFL (talk) 15:28, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

There's no evidence of human habitation in Europe from 3 million to 300,000 ybp. Do you have a source stating that France was inhabited during the Lower Paleolithic? Probably you are thinking about Grotte Mandrin which has pushed back the earliest date of human habitation in Europe to 54,000 ybp which is close to the limit of the Middle Paleolithic, with the 50,000 ybp being a rough dividing line, but these are rough figures, and I don't think the 4k difference is enough to change it to the Middle Paleolithic either, which extends back to 300,000 ybp. Mathglot (talk) 09:48, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

France has been inhabited since at least 550 000 to 400 000 ybp. This was attested by the datation of Tautavel Man, which is Homo erectus. The presence of Homo neanderthalensis has also been attested on the French territory.

There's many ressources here: Prehistory of France. And I actually find this article poor, there are many more example, especially around the Mediterranean basin, like "Grotte des Trémies" in the "calanques near Marseille. It dated back 410-370 ky.

Then, here's some ressources about the "Acehulean" industry - it's pretty clear that Europe was populated in Lower Paleolithic.

Then, considering strictly the species: Homo sapiens, you're right its presence in Europe is roughly established in France to be around 43 000 ybp with the Aurignacian industry.

If there's some doubt about the human definition, I would include everything that belongs to the genus Homo. Because some species like neandethalensis mixed with H. sapiens. DocNFL (talk) 15:42, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 14:32, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I replied using several wikipedia ressources which point out to the same conclusions.

+ The current article: France, section: History, Subsection: Prehistory (before the 6th century BC) - we can read:

"The oldest traces of human life in what is now France date from approximately 1.8 million years ago [27]. Over the ensuing millennia, humans were confronted by a harsh and variable climate, marked by several glacial periods. Early hominids led a nomadic hunter-gatherer life. France has a... "

Please, make the introduction (second paragraph) coherent with the content. Change the hyperlink to Paleolithic (and do not link the the text to upper Paleolithic is as it is now).

Alternatively make the statement more precise using "inahbitated since the Lower Paleolithic" as I suggested.

Though it's not necessary to get such precision because the introduction is already dense. Please, think that the reader won't necessarily read the "History section" but will probably question the meaning of Paleolithic and then get wrong assumptions about human history time scale and human evolution. DocNFL (talk) 05:12, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

 Note: I think DocNFL makes a compelling argument here about the incongruity between linking to Upper Paleolithic in the lede when describing earliest occupation, and describing earliest traces of occupation as occurring during the Lower Paleolithic. They've also pointed out accepted evidence of human occupation ("human" in this context includes the homo genus, but at the very least includes "archaic humans," AKA homo erectus and their contemporaries) back to the Lower Paleolithic (the most conservative of accepted evidence would presumably be actual human remains, and Tautavel Man dates to the Lower Paleolithic). While this is discussed, regarding specificity, is there any objection to changing the link in the lede to Paleolithic? Seems a no-brainer to me, given that the text already displays as "Paleolithic" and that this would be a more accurate, if imprecise, representation of the article's body. --Pinchme123 (talk) 15:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

More pertinent than the dating of early hominids in the area, which is frankly irrelevant to the development of France, a better focus of attention would be a proper chronology of the dawn of agriculture, the bronze age (currently missing), the iron age, etc. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:36, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I vehemently disagree that the earliest occupation by humans is "irrelevant", particularly because this is pointedly not an article about "the development of France", but rather France as a whole. Earliest human occupation of a defined nation-state is absolutely relevant. --Pinchme123 (talk) 15:58, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Meh. It's actually pretty stupid categorising most prehistory by modern national borders, well before any serious concept of nationhood existed. This is tacitly acknowledged by the article already, which leaps from paleolithic to 600 BCE. But for the sake of pandering to misplaced nationalistic fetishism, historians do tend to pay some sort of homage to this crap to some degree, so it can unfortunately be argued that it is relevant from a Wiki perspective to the extent that the sources mention it, e.g: a Brief History of France, which alludes to the upper paleolithic some 35,000 BCE ago, so there's a sources benchmark for those that want to squabble over different periods of the paleolithic. Anything before Homo Sapiens is ostensibly daft. Before that we're not talking humans in its most common sense, only Homo in the more technical sense. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:19, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

You're free to take up these arguments for how this article about France should be changed in a new section (though your stated changes would make it much, much worse IMO). You pointing to only one book as an apparent example of all the sources that discuss France's prehistory isn't particularly compelling, nor is your unfounded assertion that "anything before Homo Sapiens (sic) is ostensibly daft" (though it is amusing that your use of "ostensibly" means this probably isn't all that "daft", even if this meaning wasn't your intent).

But at the moment, this article's section on prehistory begins with noting occupation by humans more than a million years ago and this article's lede lede should at the very least not mislead people about what the body covers. At the moment the target for the "Paleolithic" link is misleading. Do you have an opinion about this? Because the rest of this conversation is largely off topic from DocNFL's edit request and isn't helping this discussion move any closer to a resolution.

--Pinchme123 (talk) 18:38, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I think "inhabited" here means by humans, not proto-humans. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

This isn't an answer to the question (and "proto-human" isn't a scientific term, but "archaic human" is, because archaic humans are humans), and at this point appears to be WP:IDHT. I've gone ahead and corrected your inappropriate wikilink change - without consensus - and article body edits. --Pinchme123 (talk) 19:19, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

You can frankly fuck off with your bad faith WP:IDHT while making edits that break paragraphs and create an entirely nonsensical sentence. Learn to edit before your patronize. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:30, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

No paragraphs broken, no nonsensical sentences were created, but I'm glad to see you didn't reinsert the plagiarism. Happy editing! --Pinchme123 (talk) 20:57, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

So far I have checked the Wikipedia articles for: Portugal, Germany, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Italy, and Sweden. Every one of them has some mention of human prehistory discussing early human occupation (with varying degrees of specificity and including non sapiens species in locales where evidence of occupation exists). It is absolutely normal to include this kind of info. --Pinchme123 (talk) 16:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Pinchme123, Iskandar323 for your pro-active support in making wikipedia a qualitative ressource.

Iskandar323, I'm new in the field of editing wikipedia but I felt some angriness from your replies, which is a bit damageable to the wikipedia reputation from my perspective. As said, the problem was the hyperlink. And now it's solved. Thanks you all for the discussion.

Again, my purposes was not to debate about the existence of French Neanderthal people who could have ate mammoth cheese full of national fetichism sentiment. Of course not! Nor to debate about the first date of human (Homo sp.) occupation. Nor to debate about the semantic, even if human means Homo stricto-sensu.

You raised the economical point view, I would note that the environment of France has been selected by humans for ~1/3 million year which is a good indicator of the environmental quality maybe? This also raises the importance for the future generations to preserve the unique French environment and its twelves different climates (though the ice cap climate is disappearing completely).

Second, it's important from an anthropological point of view to determine how humans have spread through the ages, it's part of our civilization, and France, like every country is part of the human civilization. Then the prehistory of France is taught at elementary school, usually during the 5th or 6th grades because it's easy to understand. This is part of the European culture in general, but the Museum of Mankind in Paris demonstrates that Korea has also a very huge early neolithic history. Lastly, a lot of people in France, in every village, have heard about local ancient occupation. Indeed, neolithic remains are at the origin of many myths in the french folklore, like Merlin Tomb in Brocéliande Forest. It's also good to know for real estate developers, that France has a huge archeological history, we never know what lays underground before building something new.

Thank you for you edits, I find the quality of the article better. Your edits in the prehistory section are remarkable, it's concise and precise. DocNFL (talk) 08:10, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

 Note: I am closing this edit request while discussion continues, per template instructions. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:33, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Eye Catching History!!!

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Is it just me, or does France have such an interesting history. Their highs, their lows, their triumphs, their failures, the royal families, the revolutionaries, the helpers, the killers, the good, the bad... It first caught my eye when watching 'Hamilton: An American Musical', the people mentioned what was happening in France. After that, I wanted to look deeper into it's history, and I find it fascinating... Any Thought? X Odin&Sleipnir (talk) 04:47, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Closed; please see your Talk page. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 07:03, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

2023 Gdp PPP estimate

3,872,729 Billions USD for the year 2023 58.830 USD per capita (2023 estimate) (source :IMF) 2A01:CB06:8037:C424:6813:2298:3CD7:65E9 (talk) 16:03, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Include Paris Commune in the history section.

Why is the Paris Commune not mentioned after the mention of the establishment of the 3rd Republic? Seems like a pretty significant event in the history of France. 69.9.128.178 (talk) 01:05, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Probably because this article is already over-long (see thread above), and there are other French history articles that can go into details.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:17, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Emblem

The only discussion for the emblem is Talk:France/Archive_6#Emblem. I don't see any justification of usage of this emblem because is simply appears on the passport. French constitution says The national emblem shall be the blue, white and red tricolour flag. That's it. Similarly Lebanon has no official emblem as well. Both should be removed like Turkey example. Beshogur (talk) 18:03, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

This resembles the argument that has been voiced in other discussions that certain countries don't have a capital because one isn't designated in their constitutions. Countries had emblems and capitals long before countries had constitutions or thought to declare their capitals or emblems in them. In addition, there's more to a country's official designations than what can be found in their constitutions. If the constitution were the sole determining factor, then the United States would have neither an official flag nor an official currency. But, certainly, it does.

Largoplazo (talk) 23:19, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

As was mentioned in that previous discussion, it seems significant that the fr.wiki page for France uses the emblem. This suggests a general consensus that it is something like a coat-of-arms. Furius (talk) 00:47, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Sources pls National symbols of France? Moxy- 01:20, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

There's a brief English account on the website of the French presidency: [2] Further sources are cited in the fr.wiki article, Emblèmes_de_la_France, but I don't have access to them. Furius (talk) 08:21, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

it seems significant that the fr.wiki page for France uses the emblem oh "French wikipedia uses" argument strikes again. This is not a valid reason. The source you've put shows the emblem of French presidency, not French Republic, and is quite different from the emblem right now. It only says The lictor’s fasces is an emblem which is very often used to represent the French Republic, which "lictor’s fasces" is the question. And although today it holds no official status. clearly states it has no official status, thus should be removed accordingly. Beshogur (talk) 10:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

(a) Why does the French wikipedia article use this emblem, then? (b) I don't think we have to remove something that is "very often used" on the grounds that it is not official. Furius (talk) 18:35, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

"Because French wikipedia uses" is not a good argument, sorry. Beshogur (talk) 18:47, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Also note the discussion of this edit request last year. Emphrase (talk) 09:48, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

See also User talk:Beshogur#Official. Laroplazo compares this with the US, but these are totally different cases. Beshogur (talk) 12:54, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Extra note, emblems used by MFA and presidency are completely different. I could agree for inclusion of this with the description they provide: The lictor’s fasces is an emblem which is very often used to represent the French Republic, although today it holds no official status. I see there is already a svg version, but can't be used here right now. Beshogur (talk) 15:53, 13 August 2023 (UTC)