Jump to content

Talk:List of wars involving France

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

This page needs to be reformatted to be in line with convention

[edit]

Might I suggest you make the page information in the same columns as List of wars involving the United States? It would look much neater and easier to read what you want to learn. These pages are supposed to be depositories of overview information and reference, in that purpose this page fails due to the confusing and wordy layout. The more common format, or some variant of it, is the standard for these sorts of articles. See the following examples:

List of wars involving the United Kingdom

List of wars involving Germany

List of wars involving Russia

List of wars involving Italy

List of wars involving Austria

List of wars involving Turkey

Battles of the Frankish Civil War of 715-718

[edit]

These battles are found at Template:Campaignbox Frankish Civil War (715-718). I don't know the best way to incorporate them here. Srnec 03:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some events have nothing to do with France

[edit]

Gallic is a different word for Celtic. Celts ruled in France, United Kingdom, Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Hungary, Switserland, Austria, Turkey, Italy, Czech Republic and other contemporary countries. The Gallic wariors fighting the Romans in contemporary Italy probaly came from Italy. The heartland of the celtic culture was Austria and southern Germany. Gallic tribes were not united, so there is no connection whatsoever with France. It is like puting all American battles under Great Britain, because the Americans speak english.

Battles that doesn't belong in this article to my opinion are:

I agree, the whole Gallic section should be removed from this article. This article should start with the Franks. Jon 15:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Probably came from Italy? Well if you looked to the page of the chiefs of the Gallic who fought Romans in all those battles, almost came from the tribe of the Senones, a tribe living in Gauls, not in Italy. Your last sentence is just fallacy, because following your logic, it would mean that french are speaking a gallic language? What you don't understand is France wasn't built on an idea of a race or an ethnic group. It's on the people living into a land.
The creation of France is indeed difficult to decide. I'd say France exists since Clovis, others believe since Philip II of France, and as a true state in the modern sense of the word it exists since the French Revolution. I think this list should start with Clovis when the ancestor of France was a united entity. The whole format of the list should be revised as well. Munin75 (talk) 19:49, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rif War (1920)

[edit]

the french replaced the spanish in morroco. don't know if it is more a colonial war or modern war. it's up to you to add it in the article. Paris By Night 06:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added the Rif War (1920) under French Colonial Empire. Carl Logan 09:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need Help

[edit]

I plan on making this list as comprehensive and complete as possible whilst taking out battles that are not suited. I'm looking for help in the Gallic section.

~ fnpmplf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fnpmplf (talk • contribs) 11:50, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you for your contributions. I think this article might be helpful to you : List of battles involving France. DITWIN GRIM (talk) 10:53, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

War of Brittany (1465–1491)

[edit]

I am sure there must be an English Wikipedia article on this somewhere, but I just can't seem to find what it is called. (It is neither the Breton War of Succession nor the Mad War.) --- The War of Brittany was two series of long conflicts separated by 20 years. It includes the War of the Bien public (1465), and a series of battles from 1487 to 1491 including the Battle of Saint-Aubin-du-Cormier (1488) and the Siege of Rennes (1491). The war was concluded by the marriage of Anne of Brittany to Charles VIII of France. -- I cannot believe it doesn't already exist. Maybe someone can point it out to me and make a redirect. Thanks. Charvex (talk) 21:51, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Listing battles

[edit]

My opinion is that it would be much clearer and concise if only the wars were listed, and not the individual battles. This would follow a format similar to 'List of wars involving Spain.' 86.99.182.215 (talk) 08:06, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Listing battles

[edit]

My opinion is that it would be much clearer and concise if only the wars were listed, and not the individual battles. This would follow a format similar to 'List of wars involving Spain.' 86.99.182.215 (talk) 08:06, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


No, because we already have plenty of other pages for that. This is no page for all the French battles and actions.

~ fnpmplf

You're wrong. First, please list at least some of the 'plenty of other pages' because I can't find them. Second the page for all the French battles and actions is List of battles involving France. King Philip V of Spain (talk) 04:01, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The IP is right. All the individual battles are listed in List of battles involving France and its related articles (in a much better and clearer format too). There is no need for them to be listed here. Can we start thinking about removing them? Of course, I would be glad to help. King Philip V of Spain (talk) 04:07, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Change of the 25th November

[edit]

I did a deep reorganization and improvement of this list, I hope none will have the bad idea to erase all I did (took me all the day) until we could discuss over it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.93.165.249 (talk) 20:34, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


What did you do?

~ Fnpmplf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.179.54.129 (talk) 23:26, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I found your contributions. THANK YOU !!!! So long as people are adding in battles and expanding on French history, there is nothing wrong at all with doing what you did. Your contributions have been excellent. I'm around the 1700s, so it's always nice to have help.

~ Fnpmplf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fnpmplf (talk • contribs) 15:22, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:24, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Format, Gauls?????

[edit]

The current state of the page is pretty deplorable. Nobody actually bothered making a proper list of wars involving France, the way similar pages about the US, England, the Netherlands, etc have been formatted? Only Gallic Wars and colonial wars caught such an attention to details? Am I the only one finding this quite suspect? Why are battles listed... There is a page for them already. And why are the Gauls even included? Gaul was not a predecessor state of France because..... well... it was not a state... Several desunited Celtic tribes (there were also Aquitani, Belgae, greek colonies in the south around Marseille, etc) lived on a territory the Greeks refered to as "Gallia". That's it That's it! It is like listing wars Celtic Britons took part in as being "english wars". Brittania was not a state. There is zero continuity as a political entity between Gallic tribes and France because... well yeah... the gallic tribes did not form a state. Even Roman Gaul was province among many others of the Roman Empire, not a state. This page needs some serious editing (Jules Agathias (talk) 09:00, 9 August 2020 (UTC)).[reply]

The Spanish War of Succession

[edit]

Clearly over the past few months there has been debate over the War of the Spanish Succession as whether to include it as a French victory or defeat. It is include as a defeat currently because the war saw a reemergence of Britain, who gained at the expense of France, while the dual Franco-Spanish monarchy was prevented. I understand the flip side of the argument that because Spain ended with a Bourbon monarch it should be included as a victory, while also the Battle of Denain led to a reversal of bad fortune to the end of the war. I’d be interested to get the communities opinion and consensus? TDF444 (talk) 08:15, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I find it mindblowing that there is even a debate about this war out of anything. It's the clearest possible case of "tie" one can find. Militarily it was a stalemate, with initial Coalition successes but then big French gains after Britain withdrew. And for the final outcome, both sides made concessions as the French managed to get their candidate on the throne but still had promise to keep the throne of Spain separated from French throne. It being anything other than the blue color of "ties" is nonsense. Btw the "reemergence of Britain" is irrelevant here. War was about Spain and this page is about France. Djam N'Bisso

Civil wars and revolutions section

[edit]

Hi @TDF444:, I saw you moved the War in the Cévennes to the Civil wars and revolutions section. I'd like to ask: is it even possible to make a clear distinction between interstate and intrastate wars? A great many of the wars listed here are both. E.g. a war of succession is almost by definition an intrastate war, and very often also an interstate war because the foreign allies of throne claimants often intervene on their behalf. A rebellion against the national government is also frequently aided by foreign powers directly or indirectly (e.g. 13 Vendémiaire). In short, I think trying to separate civil wars and revolutions from interstate wars is futile, as it results in arbitrary distinctions. No other "List of wars involving [country]" article does that either, as far as I know, so it doesn't seem to make sense. I propose we integrate this section into the rest of the list. Greetings, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 17:36, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

[edit]

@TDF444: The war ended with a peace treaty (hence the colour). If you don't agree with the way it's presented, then you need to seek consensus for your proposed changes (which will ultimately apply to the whole article). M.Bitton (talk) 23:03, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton The peace also concluded raiding of French shipping by Algiers. The French objective was to end raiding of it’s shipping therefore strategic objective has been achieved. Ending with a peace treaty doesn’t essentially mean no defined winner or loser. Who would I have to seek to achieve consensus with? TDF444 (talk) 23:09, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It ended with a peace treaty, everything else is WP:OR. M.Bitton (talk) 23:10, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It ended with a peace treaty that officially ended raiding on French shipping. Where is non-WP:OR that Algiers benefited at all from peace or it was a peace of equals for purple colouring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TDF444 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Are you honestly expecting me to justify WP:OR with WP:OR (or non OR or whatever you're alluding to)? M.Bitton (talk) 23:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The complete opposite (as stated non-WP:OR for the following) to justify the change and achieve consensus between editors for your edit to the original addition to this page. TDF444 (talk) 23:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No such thing as "original" when it comes to unsourced content. M.Bitton (talk) 23:34, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So you’re basis for a neutral result is unsourced. TDF444 (talk) 23:38, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I said what I needed to say. I'm done here. M.Bitton (talk) 23:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That’s fine, change from original is unsourced and did not reach consensus with other editors. TDF444 (talk) 23:50, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The peace treaty is sourced, everything that you're suggesting is not. Don't change it again and more important, don't edit while logged out. M.Bitton (talk) 23:52, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The peace treaty that came about after regime change as a result of the 1688 Bombardment, that then ended raiding/hostilities in 1690 (naturally that is what peace does.) If you can present anything that suggests that there was any benefit to the side of Algiers from the hostilities I won’t change it. TDF444 (talk) 00:00, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have to waste my time presenting anything to contradict your baseless WP:OR. If you whirlingly break the 3r rule (thanks for letting me know of your intentions), you will simply be reported to AN3. M.Bitton (talk) 00:04, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yet you’re here and with 10s of 1000s of edits, you’re clearly not doing much else with your time. Your edit was completely baseless and you can’t prove otherwise. I’ve presented my argument. You may as well get the original article removed in that case considering I created it. TDF444 (talk) 00:10, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Original article being the French-Algerian War 1681-88. TDF444 (talk) 00:12, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What I do with my time is none of your business. You haven't presented anything other than hot air. Creating an article doesn't make it yours.
To anyone else reading this: have a look at these sources.[1][2] and how the 1688 bombardment is remembered.[3] M.Bitton (talk) 00:14, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you don’t want it mentioned don’t bring it up. Source 1) Gains are suggested as ‘meagre’, very small but something. The whole source suggests that the objective of the French was to bring Algiers to terms, which they were in 1690, therefore this source actually proves the point well of strategic objective of the war achieved in 1690. Source 2) This refers to a Corsair captain, that is forced to defect to the Ottomans following 1688, also makes no reference there after of him raiding French shipping. Source 3) Just refers to heavy casualties and memory of that. Nothing to do with the overall result. TDF444 (talk) 00:33, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I obviously wasted more time with you than I should. Now, we are definitely done. Should you revert without getting consensus, or god forbid, sock again, I will not hesitate to report you. M.Bitton (talk) 00:41, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Essentially, here are my sources, don’t read into them, take them at face value that this means I’m right. Go for it, report me for all I care. TDF444 (talk) 00:45, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where is your consensus? TDF444 (talk) 00:46, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest a good book on basic reading comprehension. M.Bitton (talk) 00:51, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You couldn't suggest a good book even if you tried.

  • Given the fact that the already cited sources say that not only did the expedition fail to subdue the Dey, but that he retaliated by attacking the French coast and shipping,[4] I believe that the colour should adjusted to describe it as a failure (right now it's neutral). What do the others think? M.Bitton (talk) 12:18, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Geoffrey Symcox (2012). The Crisis of French Sea Power, 1688–1697 From the Guerre d’Escadre to the Guerre de Course. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 74. ISBN 978-94-010-2072-5.
  2. ^ Alexander Mikaberidze (2011). Conflict and Conquest in the Islamic World A Historical Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. p. 356. ISBN 978-1-59884-336-1.
  3. ^ By Tony Claydon, Charles-Édouard Levillain (2016). Louis XIV Outside In Images of the Sun King Beyond France, 1661-1715. Routledge. p. 138. ISBN 978-1-317-10324-0.
  4. ^ Babinger, Fr. (24 Apr 2012). "Mezzomorto". Brill. Retrieved 20 Jan 2022.

With exception of the older source which is ‘unreliable’ (so much so that recent additions were produced in 2002 and it is listed in the further reading in your second source), none of the source distinctly elude to a clear result. Further research into the histography and production of more in depth sources is required for making such a conclusion, otherwise it verges on POV and interpretation of said editor. TDF444 (talk) 00:35, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Placement of the War of the Public Weal

[edit]

Hi {{ping|FR1914}} could you elaborate on your reasoning for these movements into the civil war section, while many more clear cut civil wars remain in the main article body. Sovietblobfish (talk) 21:38, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Split proposal

[edit]

This list is simply way WP:TOOLONG for easy navigation. I propose to split it in several smaller lists.
The List of battles involving France has already been split in 4 separate era-based lists. We could do the same here:

Alternately, we could also create state-based lists following Category:Lists of wars by former country. It's essentially what this list's sections already do:

Please vote below, and give your reasons for which option seems best to you. New suggestions (or keeping everything as it is, which I do not recommend) are also welcome. Merci et salut, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:00, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Still nobody? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:46, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I will weigh in.
I think state based is the way to go, its less ambigious than time periods. I'm not sure what you mean by 'vote' as I am not aware of such functionality, but I am voicing my support Sovietblobfish (talk) 06:55, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merci! I also think that it is less ambiguous, and we get to categorise them as "by former country". It does mean the Kingdom of France still gets the bulk of it.
Well, I'm asking for a vote because that's what I'm used to at CfD and RM, but perhaps that doesn't work with splitting unless I start some sort of formal process that I'm not aware of. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The kingdom of France would be the bulk, but that makes sense, because it is under the kingdom the majority of the wars will be fought.
I also think seperating the kingdom from the Frankish realms that came before is very wise, as they aren't really France to begin with. Sovietblobfish (talk) 07:25, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Kingdom takes up about 25% of this list, but I suppose the resulting list is short enough to fix the TOOLONG problem.
For List of wars involving the Holy Roman Empire I have included East Francia (843–962), currently only containing 2 wars. But here I would include West Francia with Francia rather than Kingdom of France. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:31, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
East Francia was definitely involved in a lot more wars than that, unfortunately I lack the source base in my possession to reference it. I can think of three at least that Ludwig the German was involved in. Sovietblobfish (talk) 07:54, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh certainly. But it's not unreasonable to put East Francia and the HRE together, and Francia and West Francia together, is it? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 09:26, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I feel that implies one is more of a successor state to Francia than the others. My personal approach would be to keep the Francia's together.
Francia, West Francia, Lotharingia and East Francia in one article as they are quite fluid states that blend back and forth into each other. Then an HRE one, and a France one. Sovietblobfish (talk) 09:55, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sovietblobfish fair enough, I can agree with that. Shall I carry that one out already? Or would you like to wait for more input from others? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:15, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Whichever you feel is more appropriate :) Sovietblobfish (talk) 10:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. I don't expect this to be controversial; it is well-established in historiography that "France" only begins in 987, and that the HRE was established in 962. I'll do that first, and then we can see what the next steps might be. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:29, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done List of wars involving Francia.
@Sovietblobfish I'm having a bit of trouble with defining the scope of Middle Francia though. Strictly speaking, it ended in 855, but that's just 10 years. In fact, other than the Viking raids in the Rhineland, I know of no wars fought by "Middle Francia", unless it's just all rebellions that Lothair I had to deal with in these 10 years. Should we include Lotharingia, Lower Burgundy and the medieval Kingdom of Italy? If so, we could include wars like Louis II's campaign against Bari (866–871). But where does it end? Kingdom of Italy (Holy Roman Empire) formally only ends in 1801. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 11:36, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would definite Middle Francia as the collection of polities that descended from Middle Francia between the Treaty of Verdun and the establishment of the Holy Roman Empire in 962. However I agree, its a trickier one. Sovietblobfish (talk) 11:56, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Lotharingia conveniently ceases to exist around 959, which ties in quite nicely. The duchy of Lorraine is outside the scope of it I'd say. Sovietblobfish (talk) 11:59, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I think we could reasonably include the Duchy of Lotharingia until the split in 959. I'll also make sure to include a See also link to List of wars in the Low Countries until 1560, which picks up the story with the 1012–18 Lower Lorrainian war of succession. It also says the Viking raids in Lotharingia essentially ceased earlier than in West and East Francia due to the Battle of Leuven (891). Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:04, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Someone should probably write Carolingian wars of succession [de; fr; nl]. They are extremely defining for Frankish military history. I've also indicated at Talk:List of wars involving Francia#"Breton" war of Charles the Bald that I am suspicious of some potentially WP:OR framings that have been applied to certain sets of battles.
Admittedly, I might have been guilty of it myself when it comes to Frankish wars of succession. But at least I'm not redlinking them and giving them my own self-invented names with capital letters as if I get to decide which sets of battles belong together under which name, as if I am in the position of a scholar. (I've given my rationale for such conventions at Talk:War of succession#Conventions for the list of wars of succession). Wikipedians can invent lowercase working titles for certain sets of battles identified as a "war" by RS, even if these wars haven't been specifically named yet in RS. The redlink above Carolingian wars of succession [de; fr; nl] is a multiple interlanguage link to articles that have been written about this war on other Wikipedians, and thus I am on a bit safer ground to name and redlink it, but without inventing my own name with capital letters. Those are the kinds of balances we Wikipedians need to strike between OR and writing in our own words what RS have already said (explicitly or implicitly). Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:32, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Battle lists

[edit]

Hmmm it seems that there are no such categories for wars involving France by period. There are only 4 (arbitrarily periodised) lists of battles involving France by period, with List of battles involving France serving as a disamb:

The periods are arbitrarily defined and inconsistent. The Renaissance one is really short. The Middle Ages one lumps Francia and the pre-1488 Kingdom together. I think it makes more sense to align them all with the state-based war lists now. I'm gonna carry that out. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:10, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see... I think I'll name the pre-987 list the List of battles involving the Franks and Francia to match the categories Category:Battles involving the Franks and Category:Battles involving Francia. That makes sense. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done that and also Renamed List of battles involving France in the Middle Ages to List of battles involving the Kingdom of France. I'm going to merge the Renaissance and Ancien Régime battle lists into it now. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:32, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done! Now we should add more sources and bring everything in line. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:47, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Turned List of battles involving France into a proper disamb. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Occupation of the Ruhr

[edit]

I'm perplexed as to why the occupation of the Ruhr is counted as a war. It's not in List of wars involving Germany, it involved no battles, did not engage Germany's military, the 130 deaths (all civilian) were in response to civil disobedience and passive resistance, and its resolution (Dawes Plan) was purely economic.

If it isn't deleted (my recommendation), the "French Military Victory" should certainly be changed, although to what I'm not sure. It's a tossup historically as to whether either country came out ahead. GHStPaulMN (talk) 14:13, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one has responded, I plan to delete Occupation of the Ruhr on 3 Nov unless there are objections before then. GHStPaulMN (talk) 11:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@FR1914 I just deleted the entry for the Occupation of the Ruhr, before I remembered that I had already deleted it once before. (I wasn't intending to undo your re-entry of it on 8 Feb 2024, so my apologies). But before we decide whether Occupation of the Ruhr should stay or go, I'd be interested in knowing why you think it should be on this page, and how France 'won' it. Thanks, GHStPaulMN (talk) 01:46, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_wars_involving_France&oldid=1248406881"