Talk:French First Republic

message: removed this text:
This marked the first occasion in many centuries where a major European state moved from monarchical to republican mode, and presaged a new era of republican government(s) in Europe.
and replaced it thus:
This presaged a new era of republican government(s) in Europe.
The term "many centuries" is ambiguous first of all.  Second of all, the Dutch Republic was established in the early 17th century, less than two centuries before 1795, certainly not "many centuries". I don't know if there were any other European republics established between the establishment of the Dutch Republic and establishment of the First French Republic, so I just removed the questionable line entirely.
--Henrybaker 22:09, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: oppose scholars, editors & publishers prefer "French Third Republic" not "Third French Republic" [and likewise for the others], according to Google Scholar and Google Books search. Rjensen (talk) 03:56, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: The infobox has a title "Various" which is linked to an irrelevant article. The link is made by the template script, not the parameter to it. Is there a way to unlink it? phma 05:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Various

message: there's no french version of this article... Paris By Night 02:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: french people arent real, thats why 64.56.102.58 (talk) 14:47, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: hmmm

message: I think First French Republic sounds a little more proper than "French First Republic" and anyway, I believe it is a more precise translation of Première République française.  In addition, it is a different naming convention than we use for First French Empire.  That makes no sense.  We should stick to one convention; it doesn't seem very encyclopedic to keep things as they are. Funnyhat 04:44, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's keep the discussion unfragmented, since we will either make all these name changes or none of them.  Could everyone please respond on Talk:French Fourth Republic? Phaunt 22:36, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Renaming 

message: The French article about the flag of France (fr:Drapeau de la France) says explicitely that the de facto national flag of the Kingdom of France was a simple white flag - the lily banner was only used in presence of members of the royal family except the King: When he was present, the white flag had been hoised. To cut a long story short: Please do not insert the lily banner (Pavillon royale de France.svg) anymore, it's the wrong flag here. Louis88  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.169.30.46 (talk) 20:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag of the Kingdom 

message: I believe the red-white-blue tricolor was only used until about 1794, when it was switched to the current blue-white-red one.141.211.222.216 (talk) 21:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: They almost always used the Red Flag. Epaminondas of Thebes (talk) 13:23, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

text: Sounds good. Which sources will you use? ClioFR (talk) 16:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag 

message: I have noticed that this article is a stub, and I would like to clean it up and add to it.  I have some good published sources to draw on.  If anyone has any suggestions for changes I could incorporate besides those listed above, keep me posted.
Tkbd2009 (talk) 16:29, 12 February 2009(UTC)
:Sounds good. Which sources will you use? ClioFR (talk) 16:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed Expansion

message: Would someone with authority on the subject please write something about the "suspension of all ordinary legality 10 October 1793" mentioned in the Constitution of France article? Thank you SaaHc2B (talk) 23:34, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  suspension of all ordinary legality 10 October 1793 

message: I strongly disagree that this is B-class. It is a disguised history article, not very well sectioned nor very well referenced at that. The name implies this to be an article about state, for which the article is grossly incomplete (where is the information on leaders, organizations, politics...)? Not B class, C class at best if we are being generous, I'd say start class. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  22:54, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: B-class challenged

message: Should one not include the template History of France? I think that would be very useful. --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 15:15, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible inclusion of the "History of France" template 

message: Just landed here for the first time. I'm surprised that some have supported retaining that weird title. My preference would be "First Republic (France)", but anything would be better than "French First Republic".--Lubiesque (talk) 13:27, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree that this title is awkward.  "First French Republic" or "First Republic (France)" sound much more natural to me. 2602:306:CFEA:170:802F:8D60:48B1:E876 (talk) 00:53, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: To respond (although too late), that shouldn't happen. Because 1) France has not been the name of the country since 1789 and 1815-1830, even if common. 2) In every document, source and even the numerous constitutions, the name was (and still is today) French Republic. CocoricoPolynesien (talk) 11:40, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title awful 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:French Third Republic which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 05:29, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: "French First Republic" violates the order of adjectives in English. It should be First French Republic. See here : https://www.gingersoftware.com/content/grammar-rules/adjectives/order-of-adjectives/
2602:306:CFEA:170:7081:FD63:FD81:5C76 (talk) 03:47, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a consensus higher that this shouldn't happen (to be precise, a lack of consensus to move the page). CocoricoPolynesien (talk) 11:43, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammatically poor title 

message: Could the infobox be reworked?
All articles on the French Constitution of 1791, French Constitution of 1793 and Constitution of the Year III state that freedom of religion is protected. So for all this time there was no state religion and this should be reflected in the infobox. I would be fine with a list of all the different religions that were of significance but they should reflect "equal footing", meaning no official status.
The article on the Cult of the Supreme Being reads:   "It was officially banned by Napoleon Bonaparte on 8 April 1802 with his Law on Cults of 18 Germinal, Year X.[20]"  
:So if at all this should be the time of cessation of these religions.
I would rework it myself, but wanted to ask for consensus beforehand. 
Icarusatthesun (talk)
:Definitely not! Despite what these various constitutions said - and note tht "freedom of religion being protected" doesn't equal to there being "no state religion - the French Republic (before Napoleon) never had freedom of religion but rather fiercely persecuted religions it didn't like. That's even true for the time when France was a constitutional monarchy. Ironically, it was Napoleon who introduced actul freedom of religion alongside reintroducing a religion of state. 
:However, the "religions" section certainly bloats the info infobox. Str1977 (talk) 08:31, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox Religion 

message: The coat of arms shown here is different from the coat of arms shown on the article about the coats of arms of the French state.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.186.72.86 (talk) 16:16, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coat of Arms 

message: Very amusing. Either the article is too short or the infobox should be pruned. ibicdlcod (talk)  15:26, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox is longer than article 

message: So, the English Wikipedia has articles entitled First and Second French Empire.  Number, then nationality - which is proper according to the rules of adjectival order in English.
This is not a matter of empires vs. republics, as we also have articles on the First and Second Spanish Republics.
Yet we persist with this inaccurate and inconsistent "nationality, then number" rule for the French Republics. I'm going to assume that a non-native English speaker made the innocent mistake of writing "French First Republic" in the beginning ... but do not understand why we insist on perpetuating this mistake.
But then, we spent two decades displaying the wrong flag of Austria-Hungary, so I guess we're a stubborn bunch? 2600:1702:6D0:5160:D9B3:92CC:9790:303E (talk) 20:46, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency - move to First French Republic