Talk:Napoleon

Infobox

I really think we need to have another conversation about the family members in the infobox. It’d be good to have another talk about it with more editors involved. The “consensus” to remove valuable information from the infobox for no valid reason is being upheld by the same 2 or 3 editors, and those same few revert any edits that go against their “consensus.” I would give a detailed explanation as to why I think the family info removed should be restored but I’ve already done so in my previous conversation in the talk page, which went nowhere. I’m bringing it up again because I believe most editors would agree to restore the info, but perhaps aren’t aware of this discussion or aren’t passionate enough about it to create the conversation, I’m hoping more editors will get involved to change this ridiculous infobox. Kind regards, Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 19:57, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Is the information covered in other sections of the article, or only in the infobox? Dimadick (talk) 16:53, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

I’m speaking about the removal of Napoleons parents and children from the infobox. Those are key facts of Napoleon that should be included in the infobox. Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 18:15, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree I think it's a bit unreasonable to exclude his parents and progeny from the Infobox, considering Napoleon's quite important for the late Bonaparte dynasty. I agree to to list his children and parents in the infobox. I know that Aemilius Adolphin prefered the minimalist approach, but I agree with Robertus, legend, Векочел, and others that it's quite important for the infobox. 128.62.179.178 (talk) 20:03, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

I’ve given up trying to change the infobox. Hopefully one day another editor will start up the conversation again as this infobox quite frankly, is ridiculous. Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 23:22, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

@Robertus Pius: Consider opening an RfC. The overall appearance of the infobox of such a high profile figure cannot be decided by a handful of users. More insight is indeed required. Keivan.f^Talk 15:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Keivan.f: I have thought of that. But I’ve never personally opened an Rfc before so I’d prefer another more experienced editor open the Rfc. I’d of course give my input, as I’ve done in many Rfc’s. Kind regards, Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 16:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

It's not ridiculous, it's just that editors disagree over what key information should be recorded in the info box and some generally prefer shorter info boxes and some prefer longer info boxes. I don't see why Naps parents are so important that it is one of the essential things people should know about him. Nap was a self-made man, he didn't inherit any of his positions or titles from his parents and there probably wouldn't be any Wikipedia article about either of his parents except for what their son did. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 21:43, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Parents and children are key information about any individuals life. It makes no sense to include his spouses but exclude his parents and issue in the infobox. I agree with not having all his titles in the infobox because it made it ridiculously big, but just including his parents and issue doesn’t make the infobox much bigger, in fact you can barely tell the difference. Perhaps I was bit harsh with my wording, using words like “ridiculous” and for that I apologize, it just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me is all. Kind regards, Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 02:39, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

No need to apologise, the discussion has been quite civil. I was just trying to point out that there is room for disagreement on the issue and I don't think any of the editors are being especially stubborn. If you look at the featured articles on J. Robert Oppenheimer and Ernest Hemingway you will see that neither mentions their parents in the info boxes. I am sure there are many biographies that do, but it isn't a universal rule even for featured articles. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 04:28, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, their parents aren’t included but their children are. Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 13:31, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

His issue are just as important as his spouses. They should at least be included. If you only wish to add his legitimate issue (that being Napoleon II) then so be it. Thanks, Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 00:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't oppose adding Napoleon II. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 01:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright, I’ll go ahead and add him then. Glad we could come to a compromise. Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 01:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Added an issue link that takes you to the Children section as well so readers can see his illegitimate issue. Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 01:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

A-Class

If this article is a DGA, shouldn’t it go from A-class to B-class? 48JCL ^(talk) 18:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

because the A-class criteria is stricter than ga-class 48JCL ^(talk) 18:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

If this article was downgraded from GA it should be B class. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:01, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

@Cinderella157 wdym? 48JCL ^(talk) 23:11, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

If this article is a DGA, it goes from A-class to B-class (unless the reassessment indicates it is not sufficient to meet B class). If it is no longer GA, it can no longer be A. I have made the adjustments in the banner to reflect B class. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Ohhh thanks a lot! 48JCL ^(talk) 23:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I reverted. Unlike when a Featured Article is demoted and loses GA class, A class remains in effect when an article loses GA class. If someone wants to start a nomination to delist this as A class, I can assist.Schierbecker (talk) 01:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Napoleon's Height

There's been a myth that Napoleon's height was somewhere around 5'2, but in reality, he was just short of 5'6. Should we include that? Guythatupdatesrandomly (talk) 00:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

This discussed in the section on "Appearance and Image". Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 00:52, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Lapérouse expedition

Just stumbled across the detail on the Lapérouse page that Napoleon came close to being offered a place on this expedition, which was lost in 1788, and would've had an immeasurable impact on the course of history if he had been gone with it.

This seems worth noting on his page too! The start of the 'Early career' section skips from his 1785 graduation to 1789 in one sentence, a single sentence detailing this near miss would be a valuable addition. 2601:445:800:13F0:69A4:15C2:A62A:606A (talk) 06:50, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

This is already a very long article in which many details have to be omitted. Napoleon wasn't offerred a position on the La Perouse expedition. Unfortunately, we don't have the space to record events that didn't happen. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 07:04, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

notability / organization

One story of Napoleon at the school is that he led junior students to victory against senior students in a snowball fight, which allegedly showed his leadership abilities. But the story was only told after Napoleon had become famous. In his later years at Brienne, Napoleon became an outspoken Corsican nationalist and admirer of Paoli.

These sentences seem 1) random 2) unrelated (first two, last one) yet make up a singular paragraph. Tofflenheim (talk) 04:54, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree. My preference would be to delete the first two sentences which amost certainly are a later legend. The next sentence can be added to the previous paragraph. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 05:10, 18 August 2024 (UTC)