Talk:Fort Bard

Rename this article?
Concerning the article about the Fort Bard, I thought that as for the Amber Fort, where the first word indicates the location, it might be more correct to rename this article into "Bard Fort". Wouldn't it sound more correct in English? --Simoncik84 (talk) 12:51, 10 September 2013 (UTC)


 * That would depend on the name that's actually used. Compare the Tower of London to Windsor Castle. The fort seems to be commonly called "Fort Bard". Huon (talk) 01:24, 11 September 2013 (UTC)


 * In the Aosta Valley official website it is called "Bard Fortress", and this should be the most reliable source, I would say. What do you think? In my opinion "Fort Bard" indicated "Bard" as the name of the fort itself, while in this case "Bard" is the name of the hamlet beside the fort. This is the same for "Castello di Windsor" (it) - "Château de Windsor" (fr) - "Windsor Castle", do you see what I mean? But since I'm not a native English speaker, I need your opinion. --Simoncik84 (talk) 16:38, 11 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I had done a quick Google Books search, and the vast majority, from scholarly books like this biography of Lannes to this 19th century travel description, use "Fort Bard". Search results for "Bard Fort" were fewer, many of them not about the fort at all, and others were due to unconventional word order, such as "Bard, Fort, siege of", with the text itself calling it "Fort Bard". Results for "Bard Fortress" were far fewer still, and again included false positives such as "Bard, fortress of". Thus I'd say "Fort Bard" should be the name of the article – apparently "Bard" is the name of the fort as well as the town. Huon (talk) 18:33, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I was born and raised in Aosta, and I can confirm that Bard is the name of the town and not of the fort. The fort takes its name from the town beside it. I think that this confusion derives from the fact that the Aosta Valley is not an English-speaking zone, so that in many cases a false name might have been created... could we establish a source hierarchy? The Aosta Valley official website should be the most reliable source, but this is just my opinion. --Simoncik84 (talk) 08:52, 13 September 2013 (UTC)


 * The preferred name is the one "most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in reliable English-language sources)". Thus it's "Milan", not "Milano", and "Rome", not "Roma", and I'd say this criterion also favors "Fort Bard", not "Bard Fort". See also Google Scholar:
 * "Fort Bard: 139 hits, many of them relevant and in English
 * "Bard Fort": 19 hits, one relevant but Italian, plus two false positives of the "Bard, Fort" dictionary entry kind
 * "Bard Fortress": 6 hits, three relevant, but one or two of the three don't capitalize "Fortress" and thus don't treat it as part of the name.
 * Google Books results had a similar ratio. That looks rather decisive to me. Huon (talk) 13:43, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Since these are the criteria here on WP and since it sounds alright to an English speaker, I must obey ;) Thank you for your time. --Simoncik84 (talk) 13:13, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * In the photo gallery of the article concerned I added two photos I took some days ago in the prisons. Does this mean anything for this discussion? --Simoncik84 (talk) 09:06, 25 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Not much, I'd say. We already knew that both "Fort Bard" and "Bard Fort" were in use, and we also knew that local sources tended to prefer "Bard Fort", but I still think a clear majority of English sources uses "Fort Bard". Huon (talk) 00:30, 26 October 2013 (UTC)


 * But wouldn't the fact that local sources use "Bard Fort" constitue a purpose to put this version in the article? Of course, not as the main one, but it can't be totally ignored at this point. It is used and it is correct in English. --Simoncik84 (talk) 09:42, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * We could modify the first sentence along the lines of "Fort Bard, also known as Bard Fort, is..." If you think that's an improvement of the article I wouldn't object, but it seems rather tautological to me. Huon (talk) 11:12, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I think it's important to insert it from the point of view of the noun-adjective construction, rather than a simple tautology. --Simoncik84 (talk) 09:10, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Do "local sources" say Bard Fort in their own language? I can readily imagine a local source with imperfect English – not knowing that the normal English usage is Fort Blank, unlike Blank City – turning the words around because, y'know, English-speakers do that. —Tamfang (talk) 20:41, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Napoleon's passage of Fort Bard
In at least one account, which is not necessarily highly reliable, the garrison at Fort Bard was not able to prevent, nor even significantly delay, the passage of Napoleon's army, though they were able to give ample warning of it. Since this entire section is devoid of citations, I would suggest this as a good focal point for improvement of the article. I am unfortunately unable to do so myself. According to that source, "the whole of Napoleon's army" arrived at Ivrea on the 26th of May, and the opposing general, Melas, was hit by the news as with "a thunderbolt." That would directly contradict the timeline as discussed in this article.

Poihths (talk) 14:20, 20 June 2016 (UTC)