Talk:Jacques Hébert

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lianalopez711.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
Added lots of stuff -- translated roughly from the French page.

Hebert and the Enrages
Anonymous : Hebert was not part of the Enrages faction - he was actually very critical of them (see the critical dictionary of the french revolution, Denis Richet's "Enrages" / "Hebertistes" articles for a reference). So that sentence with Roux and Hebert linked together should be fixed.

Here's the statement that I'm referring to: "On 7 June 1793 Paris sections — encouraged by the enragés ("enraged ones") Jacques Roux and Jacques Hébert — took over the Convention"

Maybe the word "militant" could be substituted as thus "On 7 June 1793 Paris sections — encouraged by the militants Jacques Roux and Jacques Hébert — took over the Convention." Maybe "radical agitators" could work as well. But as it stands, leaving Hebert labeled as a "enrage" is a factual error, and is very misleading.

Attacks on Marie-Antoinette
It may be that "His venomous attacks on Marie-Antoinette were not entirely out of hatred for the queen, at least not initially". They were deliberate and intended to discredit the monarchy. It is not true that "Originally, Hébert was trying to not only educate his readers who she was but simultaneously awaken her to how she was viewed by the French public". False and defamatory accusations are not "educational", nor were his allegations reflecting the public view of the Queen, so much as an attempt to influence that view. As for "Many of the conversations that Père Duchesne carries with her in the newspaper are attempts at either showcasing her supposed nymphomania or attempts to beg her to reconcile her wicked ways" has nothing to do with education, for these allegations were all false.Royalcourtier (talk) 19:57, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I agree with this. I don't feel that each fact in this article is necessarily relevant to the topic seeing as some of these facts aren't completely true, as shown above. This article also seems to not be completely neutral. I feel that it does not show much of a sense of neutrality either. The author makes him out to be more villainous than he truly is. Lianalopez711 (talk) 22:54, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

As I states above, I really just feel that the author or authors only visited and researched viewpoints that agreed and represented a villainous viewpoint. Lianalopez711 (talk) 22:56, 25 January 2017 (UTC) Lianalopez711 (talk) 22:56, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jacques Hébert. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071014173234/http://www.history.com/encyclopedia.do?articleId=209830 to http://www.history.com/encyclopedia.do?articleId=209830

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:59, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Estimate of the Victims of the Reign of Terror
The estimate of the victims of the Reign of Terror on this page was 50,000. This is in conflict with the Wikipedia article on the Reign of Terror itself, which says "Between June 1793 and the end of July 1794, there were 16,594 official death sentences in France, of which 2,639 were in Paris."

I have edited the article to provide a sourced estimate more closely aligned with the historical data and the Wikipedia entry on the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdbrady22 (talk • contribs) 13:28, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Member of the National Convention?
In the infobox, it states that Hebert was a member of the National Convention - not able to substantiate anywhere.

In the french parliamentary dictionary (Dictionnaire des parlementaires français... : depuis le 1er mai 1789 jusqu'au 1er mai 1889) accessed through bnf, it does not list Hebert as a parliamentary for the period. This source is the one used in the french language article for the list of representatives of the National Convention, which also does not include Hebert. (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_alphab%C3%A9tique_des_membres_de_la_Convention_nationale). Matgopack (talk) 18:55, 4 May 2020 (UTC)