Jump to content

Talk:Maximilien Robespierre

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]

    The number of sources can be increased. Thermidor58 (talk) 10:27, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    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)[reply]

    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)[reply]

    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)[reply]

    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)[reply]

    Yeah, this is bizarre. Whoever integrated references to the French Republican calendar to this article did so in a terrible hack job. Remsense ‥  20:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]