Talk:Maximilien Robespierre
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Maximilien Robespierre article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 6 months |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Maximilien Robespierre. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Maximilien Robespierre at the Reference desk. |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Show citation statistics for CS1 and CS2 citation elements in the article.
Stats: unnamed refs = 403; named refs = 61; self closed = 51. Click show for details.
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 28, 2004, July 28, 2005, July 28, 2006, July 28, 2007, July 28, 2008, July 28, 2013, July 28, 2017, July 28, 2018, and July 28, 2021. |
Addition to the article
[edit]Good afternoon! Nikkimaria suggested putting the question on the talk page. Link to our "Talk" - User talk:Nikkimaria
I would be grateful if additional information is included in the article, which will make the controversial idea of Robespierre's appearance more objective.
Sources confirming the accuracy of the information provided and the existing controversy (in the links):
"Robespierre's appearance also causes controversy and a subject of study. In 2000, the German Historical Museum discovered a previously unknown lifetime version of the portrait of Robespierre, another version of which is kept in the Musée Carnavalet ".
Illustration - https://us-west-1.cdn.h5p.com/orgs/1291571515093333268/organization/content/1291593982462265978/images/file-60e314790ed04.jpg
https://www.amis-robespierre.org/Madame-Tussaud-et-le-masque-de
https://www.dhm.de/bildung/ida/revolutionen/1789/#c14167
https://agorha.inha.fr/ark:/54721/6cf4137d-dfd1-462e-bdd6-d63a7f33bfa4
- Reply thanks for finding this material. A version of this portrait is already in the Infobox so I don’t think we should add material to the text of the article about a version being found in Germany. The text is already long and rather rambling and this would take it off topic. We might want to consider a new article on Visual representations of Robespierre as I expect there would be enough material for that. Mccapra (talk) 11:22, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. The text in my note was not a priority. In infobox is only French version of portrait. The fact that there is no way to leave a link to the German version of the portrait in the main article on a par with the French version is disappointing. A large audience could compare the portraits. Despite the apparent similarity, the versions of the portraits differ. But I understand that further dialogue and argumentation will still not lead to a change in the decision.
- I hope you will consider the need to create an additional article, since in the minds of the masses, it is possible to correct opinions about a person and his activities by changing ideas about his appearance. Thermidor58 (talk) 15:29, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
The number of sources can be increased. Thermidor58 (talk) 10:27, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Bad article
[edit]The details in this article are for the most part NOT NOTABLE. In reading about his last day(s), the name "Robespierre" is used for both him and his brother without any distinctions being made. Who shot himself in the mouth? Who had his jaw broken? Your guess is as good as mine. We are supposed to keep track of the "5 deputies" ...why? There is way too much detail on the others. It's not very relevant where the others were taken (to jail), is it? It's not relevant that AFTER he was transported (to prison) someone showed up to "rescue" him - it led to nothing. The format is in dire need of a cleanup. And excision of all the minutia. BTW, after reading the article, I have no idea how (or if) he was injured prior to his execution. This after reading thru the section twice. This should suggest that, yeah, we've bollixed this up.71.31.145.237 (talk) 00:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Sanson's memoirs as a source for 9 Thermidor
[edit]In the section about 9 Thermidor, Charles-Henri Sanson the executioner's memoirs are cited seven times (as citation #472). These memoirs were published by his grandson Henry-Clément Sanson in the mid 1800s. While they may contain material from Charles-Henri Sanson's diary and have many facts found in other sources, they were romanticized and "extensively rewritten by a journalist", and should not be trusted in preference to actual accounts. I tagged these with [unreliable source?] and [better source needed].
Hopefully we can find actual sources with the same information. Some of the facts they support, at least Robespierre being taken to the Conciergerie, are probably covered in historical sources. Curuwen (talk) 00:01, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. One of the problems with this article has been overuse of non scholarly 19th century sources. Mccapra (talk) 06:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
What is Year II?
[edit]There are several references to "Year II" and the "Dictator of Year II." But I do not know what that means. There is no Year I or Year III mentioned, and all other dates are in the standard format. Can we add a note explaining what Year II is supposed to be? 2600:1700:46B0:7200:C53C:14CA:9903:A895 (talk) 20:09, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, this is bizarre. Whoever integrated references to the French Republican calendar to this article did so in a terrible hack job. Remsense ‥ 论 20:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- Wikipedia articles that use British English
- B-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in People
- B-Class vital articles in People
- B-Class France articles
- High-importance France articles
- All WikiProject France pages
- B-Class history articles
- High-importance history articles
- WikiProject History articles
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- Top-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- Selected anniversaries (July 2004)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2005)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2006)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2007)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2008)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2013)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2017)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2018)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2021)