Talk:Louis Antoine de Saint-Just

message: Back before I became a more responsible wikipedian - back in the days when I lurked and read instead of editing and helping - I changed the purported color of Saint-Just's hair for no reason other than to see whether it would be changed back.  I had doubts about wikipedia's capacity for protecting itself from subtle vandalism, and I figured I would switch a minor detail for a short period of time in order to see whether my little sabotage would go undetected.  Jmabel saw it and reverted it, thus giving me faith in wikipedia's ability for self-correction.  I shouldn't have done it, but I had no malicious intent and have since become a decent and mildly useful wikipedian under a number of other names and IP addresses.  To make up for my original vandalism, I created a large number of redirects for the many variant forms of Louis' name, so that this article can be found more easily (before, you had to nail a single variant to get the article to come up at all).  Anyway, I'm sorry; I have no real opinion at all on the Saint-Just hair-color issue. 141.150.105.19 01:46, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not well acquainted with the subject and the various forms of Louis' name but I've counted over 60 redirects and it seems to me that many of them are redundant. Does anybody else think so? Maymay (talk) 01:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confession 

message: In Citizens, p. 651, Saint-Just is described by Simon Schama (who has a penchant for such detail) as having long "tresses of black hair" which "fell on his shoulders" (and wearing "a single golden earring", location undescribed). SteveStrummer (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Postscript

message: Re: this edit
While the link provided for Germany - to the current unified country - is arguably wrong, I believe that the word "Germany", which at that time referred to a region defined by language, not politics, was entirely correct. "Prussia" is certainly wrong: there was no French-Prussian border. The army they were facing was mostly Prussian, but the Rhineland was not Prussian territory until after Napoleon was ultimately defeated. Perhaps we should say "the Rhineland" if Tazmaniacs has a problem with "Germany"? Or was the problem just with the link? - Jmabel | Talk 19:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps "modern Germany", or even better Rhineland as you propose would be more accurate? Tazmaniacs 05:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure why you say "modern Germany": this is "Germany" precisely as the term was then used. But "the Rhineland" is at least accurate; "Prussia" is not, so that's what I'll do. - Jmabel | Talk 16:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Germany" 

message: The heavy use of passive voice not only makes the article very confusing (Who suspected treason? Who defeated the conspiracy?) it reads as very archaic.  If it's not a fairly close copy of the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica, it sure sounds like it.
Examples:
* This was agreed to
* Saint-Just was despatched
* It was suspected
* conspiracy was defeated
* the frontier was delivered
* the German Rhineland was invaded
* Saint-Just was made president
* Belgium was gained
* a sight of which, however, had been refused
[] 18:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Writing style

message: A full third of this article is on what Camus thinks of Saint-Just! Have you no shame? No mercy? No decency? Writtenright 03:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: i kinda like the Camus section: it distracts from the EB 1911 parts. just wish there was a pithy blockquote pohick (talk) 19:33, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Par trop de Camus 

message: Shouldn't be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Saint-Just mentioned in the part about literary mentions too?
It obviously is heavily inspired by the historic persona, even sharing the "job" of sitting in the Public Safety comittee (and dying forcefully)   --145.254.103.48 (talk) 20:30, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference in Literature 

message: This recent anonymous edit is not very well written and also seems to me problematic in places. I reverted one change (you can't change a quotation!), but if anyone is at all actively monitoring this article I suggest they have a close look at all of it. - Jmabel | Talk 16:55, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Article has undergone a complete rewrite since August 2011. SteveStrummer (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent anonymous edit 

message: This is fatuous, condescending, conceited, judgemental and inaccurate:  "His inflexible "one man one vote" plan was no more successful than any other, but its fashionable reverence for the traditions of antiquity helped enhance his political cachet."
One person, one vote is Constitutional Law in the United States in 2014Lethomme (talk) 15:03, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Well. Here's a revision to clear up that. SteveStrummer (talk) 05:46, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: One person, one vote

message: Talk about how Saint-Just's decisions and tasks throughout the French Revolution affected the revolution.  What he could have done differently in order to have a better outcome.
- Biography in Context
- The History Guide: http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/louis_trial.html
Nmora052 (talk) 15:20, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible ideas and bibliography?

message: The text reads "waited until 13 November 1792 to give his first speech to the Convention, but when he did the effect was spectacular. What brought him to the lectern was the discussion over how to treat the king after Varennes.[35] In dramatic contrast to the earlier speakers, Saint-Just delivered a blazing condemnation of the king."
This is most certainly not true, as the first speech he gave was about an economic matter. I think it was related to grain shortages in Paris and how to solve the crisis.
I'm pretty certain i read this in Bernand Vinots "Saint-Just" and also in Jörg Monars "Saint-Just".
Icarusatthesun (talk) 22:02, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  First speech in convention 

message: Reasons why I reverted to previous: 
*"Too broad a claim"
: It's sourced to Hampson, whose bio of SJ is highly regarded. Other sources affirming the revolutionary vogue of Greco-Roman virtue are easy to find. 
*"NPOV, references Robespierre's feelings (WTF)"
: The whole paragraph is not based on his feelings, and the part which is uses them to explain his actions. Without this fully sourced paragraph, the narrative structure of the section is destroyed. 
*"support among whom? NPOV"
: Support among the deputies: that should be obvious. As for "convenient pretext" being NPOV, that's a direct quote from Doyle. 
*NPOV
:I don't know of any author who claims that Danton was not condemned via trumped up charges, but if you can mention even one, I will go along.
*"violence does not provide stability"
:That's why it says a "mirage of stability". It gave the Robespierrists an apparent dominance, but it was... a mirage. 
*"constitution"
:Fixing refs that you yourself broke is nice. But "legislatorial" is already covered by "political" I think. Anyway , I might go along with it if it weren't for the next edit. 
*"Undid revision 861803773 by SteveStrummer
:There it is, the whole reason for this edit-bomb. I'm not sure if you'll take credit for that first edit, but it doesn't matter: I undid it then and now because it is a clear ploy to make SJ seem anodyne, even admirable, by shifting undue weight to the Ventose Decrees (which never took effect) and away from the Terror (which very much did).  SteveStrummer (talk) 02:22, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: There is not trace of a doubt that the set of your edits is supported by quite decent refs but the IP edits were not devoid of their own virtues, superficially where my own eyes are concerned at least. Partisanship still today is not fully to be discarded even among historiasn when it comes to opposing such great figure to such other great frame of the period, thus I'm not positive regarding suggestive assertions such as that of a "convenient pretext" (in the matter of the French East India Company). This is completely disregarding Fabre d'Églantine role and behaviors in the matter, so if I may add, by extension, purely ignoring fatality but designing instead some mysterious set of villains whose only purpose regarding good order would have been getting Georges D. down the drain. It's the only set of double quotes I found which can not be related to a direct quotation from the prose of the era by the way. --Askedonty (talk) 14:45, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: William Doyle says: "The case offered a convenient pretext, since Fabre before his arrest had been a leading opponent of continuing terror." I don't know of any author who has said that Fabre (let alone Danton and the others) committed any crimes that merited the death penalty. SteveStrummer (talk) 22:11, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course not. In his "Histoire de la revolution" (french) Adolphe Thiers mentions, just before his account about Danton's fall, the executions of Ronsin and Clootz. He comments: "So were those poor souls offered in sacrifice to the indisputable necessity of establishing strong and firm a governance." --Askedonty (talk) 17:32, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: But I'm curious about the fact that Fabre was in detention since a couple of months when the final blow fell on the Hebertists. Enumerating the number of heads Danton during his own trial claimed to have led to their fall also leads to wonder whether such a pretext would have been necessary. Danton had a stay in London, was involved in very complicated dealings with the state finances during a critical period, he is also said to have ultimately claimed in private he'd led himself to his own death. Thus it's a matter of choice to decide that people were targeted for their personae instead of taking most actors  struggling with the consequences of a monarchy speedily eradicated, amongst those, an urgent need of keeping corruption at large. Which Danton may have not been able to see.   --Askedonty (talk) 13:31, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

text: Late reply, but at that time embezzlement of funds as a politician was grounds for execution- that was what d'Eglantine and by extension Danton were accused of. CherryPigeon (talk) 21:13, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent IP edits 

message: In response to a request on my talk page, I'd like to offer the following comments to help prepare the article for a FAC. They come with the proviso that I'm not hugely familiar with the French Revolution: 
*The lead is probably a bit brief - I'd suggest fleshing out the paragraphs.
::Done.  
*Please also make sure that the first para sets out the scope of the article per MOS:LEADPARAGRAPH.
:: Done. 
*"After a promising start, Saint-Just acquired a reputation as a troublemaker, augmented by infamous stories" - were these stories in circulation when he was a child, or later? (I'm also not sure that "augmented" is the best word here?)
::This definitely needed clarification. I hope this rewording helps?
*"Nonetheless, he earned his graduation" - could this be "Nonetheless, he graduated"?
::I went with the more formal "was graduated" here.
*"it gave a juvenile foreshadowing of his own political extremism" - this is hard to follow
::Changed to this.
*It's unclear how Saint-Just went from being an unemployed university drop out to an influential figure in his town. Could this be fleshed out? 
::His rise was mostly based on his success in the local National Guard unit. I reworked the Early Revolutionary section to stress that point. 
*" Saint-Just directed his focus on the single goal of revolutionary command." - is this necessary?
::I feel like it is. It sums up his turn away from his other endeavors, and mimics his own abrupt, decisive style. I'm open to persuasion though. 
*"Blérancourt's traditional power structure was reshaped by the events of 1789." - please specify that this is when the revolution started
::Done.
*"It revealed an unexpectedly moderate set of principles" - who considered this unexpectedly moderate?
::Removed: I was getting ahead of the narrative there.
*"He left for Paris to join the National Convention as its youngest member" - I'd suggest saying what his age was
::I incorrectly used prose instead of numerals for his age. Hopefully it stands out more now!
*How and why did Saint-Just transition from advocating constitutional monarchy to wanting to execute the king and drafting a lengthy republican constitution?
*"exacted the arrest" - could this be replaced with "arrested"?
::Yes, it could!
*"compelled to make some obeisance" - I don't think the grammar is quite right here
::All new wording for clarity.
*"a vote on 13 Ventôse" - please provide the conventional date as well
::Done.
*Why was Saint-Just sent back to the army in 1794?
::His commissar skills were needed: Springtime was expected to bring an offensive at the front. 
*"he alone emerged unruffled from the wild, violent final arrest" - the Thermidorian Reaction article states that he was badly beaten and one of his eyes was gouged out. Is this incorrect?
::It was commander François Hanriot who suffered the injuries. I'll make a change to the Thermidorian Reaction article to make this more clear.
*"Throughout his lifetime, Saint-Just continued to work on books and essays about the meaning of the Revolution" - I suspect that this sentence should start with "Throughout his political career" or similar
::Done.
*"Œuvres complètes." - can this be replaced with something like "complete editions", or is it a different concept?
::It's not a different concept; I replaced it with English. 
*The images are all PD and tagged correctly
*Some of the article's grammar is a bit off, with unusual choices of words. I've made some example edits which may be helpful, but I'd suggest asking someone to read through the article closely for this. 
::I will make a request at GOCE. 
*I'd also encourage you to put the article through a Military History Wikiproject A-class review, as this provides a comprehensive pre-FAC assessment by knowledgeable editors. Nick-D (talk) 09:56, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: , thanks so much for your time and attention! It will take me time to address these issues, but I really appreciate your help. SteveStrummer (talk) 20:29, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: , I'm responding to these issues as I do them, but the remaining ones will probably take me a lot longer. I just wanted to say I know you're too busy to stay in contact while I work on them, but I hope I can look forward to your reassessment after I'm done with them all. Even if you can't, I appreciate what you've already done. Thanks for your time! SteveStrummer (talk) 00:57, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've watchlisted this page, but please ping me if I can help. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 07:47, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Informal review 

message: Jeremy Popkin uses an interesting detail in his A New World Begins (2019) which could be added here but where? After the September Massacres or after the Insurrection of 31 May - 2 June 1793.Taksen (talk) 10:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Epigraph by François Furet 

message: Hello 
The source is a quote by Louis-Marie Stanislas Fréron who was accusing the three men of the formation of a triumvirate on the day before his execution...
The text should be moved to the Thermidor section and should properly state that this was an accusation by a political adversary.
:I am fine with it now. Removed from lead section and accurately reports the content of the source.
Icarusatthesun (talk) 16:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit by Lucullus19 - Triumvirate 

message: Please add to Popular Culture the Honor Herrington series by David Webber.  Throughout the series there are two major villains, Rob Pierre and Oscar Saint-Just.  These two characters are the leaders of the Committee of Public Safety of the People's Republic of Haven. 2600:1700:D250:B6D0:1C27:8CFA:5A99:93A2 (talk) 21:58, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please add to Popular Culture the Honor Herrington series by David Webber