Talk:Académie Française
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Académie Française article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
Académie Française is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||
|
This level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Spelling issue[edit]
Thanks to the anonymous individual who pointed out that "ordonance" was a misspelling. Nevertheless the correction should be to "ordinance" rather than to "ordonnance" as it is the former that refers to a law or decree. I also fail to see the reason for the italics. Eclecticology 18:45, 2004 Mar 22 (UTC)
French citizenship?[edit]
Can only French citizens be members or any francophone? -- stewacide 06:08, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- There have been a few who have been born abroad, but it's hard to say whether citizenship is a factor, Eclecticology 07:44, 2004 Mar 26 (UTC)
- The Academy's website mentions that anybody can apply for membership. The site does not make any mention of citizenship. olivier 10:11, Mar 27, 2004 (UTC)
Finished?[edit]
Despite all the huffing and puffing in January when I last visited this article, it is still not finished, although the formatting has certainly improved. Are these historical lists really so hard to find? Adam 01:44, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'm in the process of finishing the list. -- Emsworth 01:09, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)
My Lord, I am pleased to see you applying your usual diligence. My comment above was aimed at the people who told me in January to mind my own business and then left it unfinished for months. Adam 01:21, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I've moved the list of immortels to a separate page because it was lengthening this one too much. Now, with the professions, even that page is too long. On that basis, it might be necessary to remove the professions. -- Emsworth 21:29, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)
Requested move 16 March 2020[edit]
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: There is a rough consensus to move. The disagreement was between MOS:FRANCE and WP:NCCORP. MOS:FRANCE says to prefer native or official names, but it also points to WP:NCCORP which says to prefer common usage. The minority in opposition points to MOS:FRANCE's preference for native names, but NCCORP's preference for common usage in English was not really addressed. Given the rough consensus here and wider consensus supporting WP:COMMONNAME, I've moved the page. Editors suggest an RfC to resolve the broader issue of capitalizing proper nouns in non-English orthographies. — Wug·a·po·des 22:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
Académie française → Académie Française – I lowercased the "française" to match the article title (and the official name). Unfortunately, it was reverted, with the reason being, "This is the form found in standard English texts. Wikipedia does not use the official name." Therefore, I am requesting to uppercase the first letter of "française". Although the move seems technical, I think it is controversial. Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 09:04, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support This should be an empirical question, not based on personal opinion, so I've checked for examples in several mainstream English-language sources.
- Encyclopaedia Britannica: French Academy with Académie Française as an alternative title
- The Catholic Encyclopedia: French Academy
- Encyclopedia of the Enlightenment (2013): Académie Française
- The Times: Académie Française
- The New York Times: Académie Française
- Los Angeles Times: Académie Française
- The Washington Post: Académie Française
- The Cambridge Guide to the Theatre: Académie-Française (hyphenated)
- The Molière Encyclopedia: Académie Française
- McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of World Drama (1984): Académie Française (vol. 1, p. 546 "Corneille, Pierre")
- Brockett's History of the Theatre (2008): French Academy
- Forman's Historical Dictionary of French Theater (2010): Académie française
- I think I will stop here, since so far this is the only one that matches the current article title. --Robert.Allen (talk) 17:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support. "French Academy" is a commonly-used name in English, but if we're using the French form as more common, the uppercase appears to be a no-brainer. A search of All pages with titles containing française indicates that in similar article titles most are capped, e.g. Action Française (which has lede starting "Action française"in lowercase), Alliance Française de Madras and many other local branches. 94.21.10.195 (talk) 20:22, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
- Strong oppose those sources have their MOS, we have our MOS, i.e. WP:FRMOS. If someone wants to change it they need to hold an RFC, change the MOS and then change 1000s of article titles to Ango-Frenchlish capitalizaton. In ictu oculi (talk)
- It is a basic principle that as editors of the English Wikipedia, we should rely on what we find to be the practice in well-edited, mainstream English sources. With very few exceptions these sources capitalize foreign proper names as though they were English proper names, so that is the practice we should follow. It's not as though all of these sources were engaging in different practices, so we can pick and choose. There is a high degree of consensus among them. It should not be a case of "they have their MOS, and we have our MOS". Typically the Wikipedia MOS follows common practice rather well, but in this case not so much. I would support changing it. (per WP:OFFICIALNAMES and WP:COMMONNAME) --Robert.Allen (talk) 10:09, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
- It's a basic principle that we abide by the MOS, that's what it's there for. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:57, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- It is a basic principle that as editors of the English Wikipedia, we should rely on what we find to be the practice in well-edited, mainstream English sources. With very few exceptions these sources capitalize foreign proper names as though they were English proper names, so that is the practice we should follow. It's not as though all of these sources were engaging in different practices, so we can pick and choose. There is a high degree of consensus among them. It should not be a case of "they have their MOS, and we have our MOS". Typically the Wikipedia MOS follows common practice rather well, but in this case not so much. I would support changing it. (per WP:OFFICIALNAMES and WP:COMMONNAME) --Robert.Allen (talk) 10:09, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: If I understand it correctly, this proposal is contrary to the relevant Wikipedia MoS section, i.e., WP:FRMOS. This is clearly a French phrase (quintessentially French, as the Académie is the guardian of the French language) and should follow French orthography. Wikipedia has a style guide and should follow it. I doubt there would be support for changing the style guide. —BarrelProof (talk) 14:42, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
- The evidence linked above shows that "Académie Française" has become an English name for the organization, along with "French Academy". The relevant guidelines are WP:COMMONNAME and WP:OFFICIALNAMES. --Robert.Allen (talk) 20:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Can someone point to which part of MOS:FRANCE goes against this proposal? There is guidance on capitalization of the names of works of art, but not of organizations as far as I can see. Nardog (talk) 20:22, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
- The relevant section would be Wikipedia:Manual of Style/France and French-related articles#Names of organisations and institutions, which refers us to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies), where it says: "Whenever possible, common usage is preferred (such as The Hartford for The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. and DuPont for the E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company)." All four of the major English-language newspapers linked above use "Académie Française" without translation, so this seems to be the common name in English, and this proposal is consistent with that guideline. However, MOS:FRANCE then goes on to say: "names of organisations and institutions (e.g. orchestras, musical ensembles and groups, concert halls, festivals, schools, etc.) should follow official usage (i.e. the spelling, punctuation, etc. used by the organisation's own publications – always check whether the organisation has English-language publications. In the case of non-English names, we use official English versions if and when they have been established by the organisation itself. If not, we use the native name." What it does not recognize is that when French names are commonly used in English without translation, they become part of the English language, and the guideline no longer applies. Even so, the guideline is inconsistent with general Wikipedia practice. --Robert.Allen (talk) 21:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: This seems to be the revert in question above. Fascinating that it left the article using lowercase in the lede and uppercase in the infobox, and this is still the situation as I write. Most unsatisfactory. Whichever way we go we should at least be consistent in the article, surely? Andrewa (talk) 14:52, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
- The article is written in English, so it uses uses the English version of the name. That's why we want to change the title. Wikipedia titles generally follow what is common in English sources (see WP:UE). MOS:FRANCE#Names of organisations and institutions says it is subject to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies), which says "Whenever possible, common usage is preferred", so I don't think the guideline is saying we should ignore this, rather only in cases where we can't find a name in English sources, we should use the official French name. --Robert.Allen (talk) 21:18, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support per nomination, per very detailed examination of the issue by Robert.Allen and per 94.21.10.195. Since this is English Wikipedia, it follows common-use English orthography as exemplified by manuals of style used by newspapers and other media. In the English-speaking world, the name of this French linguistic institution is well known under its English name — French Academy (which I would also support as this article's main title header) — as well as under its French name which, in the manner of all non-English terms incorporated into English, has been rendered through the use of English, not French orthography. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 07:31, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- Disagree with your basic premise here (but not all of the post). ...it follows common-use English orthography as exemplified by manuals of style used by newspapers and other media... No, not at all. We have our own manual of style, which we try to make suitable for our unique role, and also our own naming conventions. There are issues of style here, but these other style guides do not in the least undermine our own policies and conventions. You make some good points, but the premise by which you justify them is false, and I think that's important. Andrewa (talk) 16:45, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
- Perhaps user Roman Spinner did not state things completely accurately, but I'm not sure there is really a disagreement. The naming conventions page in our manual of style that you linked says: "The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage" (see link to section WP:UE). We found it is common in English to capitalize the letter "F" of "Académie-Française", and it is the most commonly used form of the name. (We did not consult other manuals of style.) I also noticed wp:manual of style says "participants in a wikiproject cannot decide that a Wikipedia policy or guideline does not apply to articles within its scope." That seems to mean when there is disagreement between a subordinate page and a higher level page of the MOS, the higher level page takes precedence. --Robert.Allen (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
- Support as proposed only (French Academy is a weird, made-up title that's kind of ambiguous). In English, which I'm pretty sure we use here, we capitalize proper nouns. On the other hand, when we capitalize Spanish album titles (see Limón y Sal, the name of an album that literally does not exist, since the only album with that name is called Limón y sal), I get upset, too, just like he doesn't like what's happening here. This suggests that, as IIO has proposed, we need a site-wide RfC on capitalizing proper nouns whose names are written in other Latin-script languages that have their own rules for capitalizing proper nouns. Red Slash 23:53, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Suppoert as proposed - Opposers argue on the basis of MOS.... but MOS:FRANCE#Names of organisations and institutions says nothing about avoiding "French-styled" capitalization or favouring "common English" capitalization (isn't it ironic how languages have a capital first letter in English but not en français...) Quoth le Manuel Stylistique : "
names of organisations and institutions should follow official usage (i.e. the spelling, punctuation, etc. used by the organisation's own publications.)
It also says we should prefer the English-language version of an organization's name if, and only if, it is a name that the organization itself uses; thus I would weakly support a move to French Academy if sources demonstrate that l'Académie calls itself by that English-language name. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 12:51, 5 April 2020 (UTC) - Support as proposed, per the nom. Since it has been demonstrated that English-language sources style it in standard English orthography, as a capitalised proper noun, there is no reason for us to deviate from that per WP:UE. — Amakuru (talk) 08:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – English French Academy or French as it is, with lowercase; the capping in the French name is a weird English bastardization, not so common, and not really compliant with our style of avoiding unnecessary capitalization. Dicklyon (talk) 05:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Category:Académie française has been nominated for renaming to Category:Académie Française[edit]
Category:Académie française has been nominated for renaming to Category:Académie Française. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 17:22, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Pakistan and the Urdu language.[edit]
Pakistan has a National Language Promotion Department for Urdu which seems to have a similar purpose to the Académie Française. Are there any other countries with a similar purpose? ----MountVic127 (talk) 04:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
What does it do?[edit]
The lead should explain more about what purpose the organization serves, rather than focusing on its membership and history of operation. GeoEvan (talk) 22:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- B-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in Society and social sciences
- B-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Society and social sciences
- B-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
- B-Class organization articles
- Mid-importance organization articles
- WikiProject Organizations articles
- B-Class France articles
- High-importance France articles
- Paris task force articles
- All WikiProject France pages
- B-Class Linguistics articles
- Low-importance Linguistics articles
- B-Class applied linguistics articles
- Applied Linguistics Task Force articles
- WikiProject Linguistics articles