Talk:Rue de la Chaussée-d'Antin

this is not a translation from the french wikipedia.
I am going to do what I can with it based on the French, but it's a garbled translation from some other language. Elinruby (talk) 07:08, 12 December 2015 (UTC)


 * "sited to provide a focal object at its upper end. It has one section of the Galeries Lafayette department store" possibly this means the church is at the upper end. Galeries Lafayettes is on Boulevard Haussman according to its article; this may mean an entrance opens onto this street. It's a pretty big store. If anyone wants to log into Google street view and figure this out have at it. This text is not in the French version. The rest of the sentence is worded differently than the French version but is consistent with it. Elinruby (talk) 07:17, 12 December 2015 (UTC)


 * "with a straggling string of raffish premises and a bridge without a handrail across the fouled brook of Ménilmontant." plausible -- there's a Menilmonant in Paris somewhere -- but this is too many adjectives without a reference, and has no support in french wikipedia. Based on word order probably not from a romance language. 07:30, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * this might be the "great sewer" that french wikipedia talks about, without mentioning names, if anyone feels like researching this. Saw something that might indicate that in one of the *other* bad streets of Paris articles this links to Elinruby (talk) 08:15, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Add link to the right page : Ruisseau de Ménilmontant


 * Cabaret de la Grande Pinte - french page exists, which claims there is an english page. English page does not exist. I am thinking this means somebody questioned notability. It's not a stunning important topic, but it looks like a minor historical point of interest if you are into French history of the periodElinruby (talk) 07:47, 12 December 2015 (UTC)


 * seen this elsewhere also since making this comment, while working on this article. Possibly this is what happens when something is redlinked. Somebody seems to be on a travel guide to Paris project (which is another issue). Also, someone translated "cabaret" here as hostelry. Just -- no. Elinruby (talk) 17:26, 12 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I dont understand the problem. There is a French page Cabaret de la Grande Pinte, complete and without English page. I fixed the name : this is Cabaret, not Caberet. --Tangopaso (talk) 19:28, 16 December 2015 (UTC)


 * hôtel de Montmorency: Can't just do an interlanguage link as that would go to a page about several buildings. Apparently there was more than one known by this name. Or maybe I should link to that page anyway. But in this context the word does not mean hotel as in inn, it's more like a palace or mansion (see photos).
 * Right ! there are several. But in French, hotel or hotel particulier means mansion. But the word is also used in English for French buildings. --Tangopaso (talk) 20:17, 16 December 2015 (UTC)


 * "The rotunda on the facade has been kept". No. Something is wrong with this. But I don't know if it is supposed to be the facade on the rotunda or some sort of round design in molding on the walls. Refers to hotel richelieuElinruby (talk) 10:56, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The rotunda has been kept (or preserved ?) see photo. --Tangopaso (talk) 20:14, 16 December 2015 (UTC)


 * "gave this quarter of Paris its name" -- supposedly this street did. Removed as dubious, unreferenced and unsupported by the french wikipedia. Probably quarter should be translated as neighborhood, but even so, never heard of it, which is not an *expert* opinion but certainly educated enough to question unreferenced material. Elinruby (talk) 17:26, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Please look better : Quartier de la Chaussée-d'Antin --Tangopaso (talk) 20:24, 16 December 2015 (UTC)


 * "In 1977, 400 pieces of sculpture, from the facade of the cathedral Notre Dame de Paris, were found underground. Especially heads of the kings of Juda. During the French revolution, the statues were destroyed because people thought that they were statues of kings of France." -- unsourced and very surprising. Pretty sure I would have heard of this. The revolution was very violent and most peasants were uneducated, sure, but why bury them? Surely they had hammers? To my understanding unsourced material is ok if translated from french wikipedia, because then *their* standards on sources apply. Well, this is not on the French wikipedia; cannt speak to the Japanese wikipedia; may possibly be able to decipher the italian enough to figure out if it's worth sending it over there for translation proofreading. Meanwhile, I lived in France shortly after this period and actually studied the sculptures of Notre Dame to some extent and have never seen this story before. The world is full of things I don't know but this one requires a reference. Elinruby (talk) 19:27, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * If you make more efforts to read fr wikipedia, you will find in the page : En 1977, 400 fragments sculptés appartenant à la façade de Notre-Dame de Paris sont retrouvés dans la cour de cet hôtel, notamment les têtes des statues des rois de Juda de la façade de la cathédrale, qui avaient été détruits par les révolutionnaires qui croyaient qu'il s'agissait des rois de France. And in the page Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Paris (paragraph Galerie des Rois) : Vingt-et-une têtes originales ont été retrouvées en 1977, à l'occasion de travaux entrepris pour la rénovation de l'hôtel Moreau, rue de la Chaussée-d’Antin dans le 9e arrondissement de Paris, et sont actuellement exposées au musée national du Moyen Âge (musée de Cluny). Bien que mutilées par leur chute, elles ont conservé des traces de polychromie (du rose sur les pommettes, du rouge pour les lèvres, du noir pour les sourcils, etc.). When the statues were destroyed, an unknown parisian kept the heads and preserved them by burying them. I restore the paragraph --Tangopaso (talk) 19:51, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Answers
Dear friend. Before deleting paragraphs, please have better looks and finer researchs on French wikipedia or on Google. Or ask question on the talk page. And be careful : You confused Louis XV (18th century) and Louis IV (9th century) ! Best regards. --Tangopaso (talk) 20:56, 16 December 2015 (UTC)