Talk:Treaty of Paris (1815)

message: I havent found any areas annexed by France 1790-1792. Which exactly areas were subject of change?
Cautious 17:51, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 2005-2006

message: I have removed:
:The treaty is promulgated "In the Name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity,"(ref name=BFO-280) a foretaste of the return of the exiled Jesuits and the renewed role of religion, especially of Roman Catholicism, in the reaction to the Napoleonic Era.
Because it is true that "The treaty is promulgated "In the Name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity," but the analysis needs a source.
See page 191 of A collection of treaties between Great Britain and other powers; (1790). It shows the start of the "The Definitive Treaty of Peace and Friendship between
his Majesty the King of Great Britain, and their High Mightiness the States General of the United Provinces of the Low Countries. ... In the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. So be it. ... Done at Paris the 20th of May, 1784" (Peace of Paris (1783)#Peace with the Dutch republic). If the wording indicated a "foretaste of the return of the exiled ..." then why would two Protestant states use such wording?  --PBS (talk) 15:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know,  the Church of England is not a unitarian church.Eregli bob (talk) 02:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most Holy and Undivided Trinity 

message: I am moving the wording into a footnote, because some American sources use the name "second treaty of Paris" to refer to the Treaty of Paris (1783).  --PBS (talk) 15:36, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second treaty of Paris 

message: :"and is widely regarded as an Epoch event separating the period of history known as Early Modern Europe from the Modern Era. There was no doubt in the mind of any competent statesman that the events of the prior 65-75 years had cast the European world into untraveled territory."
This recently added text expresses a POV and need a source. So I am removing it until such a source is provided. --PBS (talk) 15:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "his short-lived resurgence was the death knell signal for Monarchism and Authoritarianism for the average people no longer felt they needed to maintain their station; though the process would take the larger part of two centuries to complete.
--PBS (talk) 15:48, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Epoch event

message: This edit on 9 September 2004, introduced this sentence:
:"Although some of the Allies, notably Prussia, initially demanded that France cede major territory in the east, rivalry among the powers and the general desire to secure the Bourbon restoration made the peace settlement less onerous than it might have been."
among others. At such an early date no explicit source was given but an external link was provided: "Treaty of Paris,: e-text"
The link is no longer current and the WaybackMachine is down at the moment  S
so I can not check if this wording appeared in that napoleonseries.org article.
The 2004 text for this sentence is still in this Wikipedia the article. But it also appears in 
*
However an examination of the copyright status at the start of the book "First published 2011. Text © Ian Bickerton 2011" So the text that appears on the Wikipedia page is not a copy of the text from  The Illusion of Victory. Whether it is a copy from another copyrighted source is not yet clear. -- PBS (talk) 21:38, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The www.napoleonseries.org is now the www.napoleon-series.org and it has a file on it which prohibits WaybackMachine searches however AFAICT the original "Treaty of Paris,: e-text" is now under  Treaty of Paris 1815 and is a partial quote of the full treaty with no analysis. So the sentence in question was probably not copied from the napoleonseries.org website. -- PBS (talk) 01:59, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright problem

message: Does "a like ram of 100 millions" mean? It's been in the article since the article took its present form and so obviously is not vandalism. Parsecboy (talk) 15:49, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Guess they mean "a like sum" (the same as the sum awarded to the four nations just above): Noyster  (talk),  16:39, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but there's no definition of "ram" I know of that is a synonym for "sum". Parsecboy (talk) 16:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: @Parsecboy well spotted. It was an OCR error I missed when extracting the text from the copyright expired article. It should have been sum (as can be seen in the original article). The wording of articles like this are not fixed in stone and even if it had been a archaic technical term, there no harm done in updating such language. -- PBS (talk) 13:40, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  What on Earth...