Talk:The Fronde

Split
I advocate that the article be split into two, with the Fronde being discussed here, but the Franco-Spanish War being discussed elsewhere ('elsewhere' being Franco-Spanish War (1653), which is now a redirect to Fronde). Although obviously connected, the civil conflict cannot be combined with the foreign conflict so carelessly. Bastin 12:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Support. Sounds good to me - they are two pretty distinct topics. Funnyhat 16:25, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

The best way is this standard method, which I'll initiate:
 * Cut and paste the section Franco-Spanish War (1653) as an independent article under that heading. Include any references from here that pertain. (Done.)
 * Provide the new article with a concise opening summary linking Fronde as its general context. (To do.)
 * Return to Fronde and concentrate the subsection somewhat with a heading Main article Franco-Spanish War (1653). (To do.)
 * Enrich the new article with further detail and references. (To do.)

The reason? The Franco-Spanish War (1653) is the outcome of those earlier episodes, the Fronde parlementaire and the Fronde des Nobles. Its limitations are shaped by those earlier events. The three episodes are one phenomenon, which had the effect of discrediting "freedoms" in the old feudal sense in France, (rather than the "new" personal sense) and set the stage for absolutism.

Dividing information into chunks that are too small has the effect of losing information. Making new articles in this manner preserves context.

The changes I've made have created an overlap of text that is only temporary. The section here needs to be condensed (not too much I hope), and the new article needs to be enriched. Nothing has been lost.--Wetman 01:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Support to remove the section on Franco-Spanish War (1635–1659). Fronde is a part in a way but this is not encyclopedic --Akrasia25 (talk) 21:40, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Who was Fighting and Why?
The opening paragraph doesn't tell who was fighting who or why they were fighting? It may be buried elsewhere in the article but as the next section jumps straight into detail I didn't follow up.

A good opening should summarise the main issues.

--Gramscis cousin (talk) 12:22, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

--done--Akrasia25 (talk) 17:08, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Cleanup
I've cut a few bits out which were subjective/irrelevant/bad English so if anyone has any problems with my edit then feel free to take me to task over them. JacobJHWard (talk) 16:25, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks good, thanks. Ratagonia (talk) 15:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * There's a whole lot of subjectivity remaining in this article.


 * Pazouzou (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

What "anarchy"?
In the section "The Franco-Spanish War (1653–1659)" it is currently stated "The whole country, wearied of anarchy and disgusted with the princes [...]".

I suggest this should be changed as the state of the country neither matches the definition of the article for Anarchy nor Anarchism.

Probably something along the lines of "The whole country, wearied of bad ledership, lack of governmental coordination and disgusted with the princes [...]".

85.225.176.180 (talk) 12:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Infobox needed
This article needs an infobox; the lead doesn't even say who won the conflict! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * An infobox is not a substitute for text. I shall make it clear in the opening summary that the absolute monarchy "won'.--Wetman (talk) 13:15, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:THE
It seems to me that the Fronde is a clear case where "the" is needed, like The Holocaust per WP:THE. I guess we could have the English article, but it seems more sensible to stick with the French and add "La" instead. Does anyone have any comments? I've tried a move but it's blocked so a request move discussion will be needed. —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:00, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * No comments? —Brigade Piron (talk) 00:55, 9 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Support La--Akrasia25 (talk) 21:42, 31 December 2018 (UTC)


 * After consulting various sources (ie Dalin's "The Fronde" I now support 'The') Seems like English historians use the English article --Akrasia25 (talk) 15:06, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I think there's an analogy with The Troubles too. —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:21, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 12 October 2020

 * 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: Moved  (t &#183; c)  buidhe  04:46, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Fronde → The Fronde – Per my earlier comment, now several years old, above. This seems a pretty clear case of WP:THE ("official or commonly used proper name") as the works already cited in the article attest, eg The Fronde: A French Revolution, 1648-1652 or, more recently 1652: The Cardinal, the Prince, and the Crisis of the Fronde. —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:19, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Makes sense to be me.--Akrasia25 (talk) 11:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:THE. Starting an article title with "The" is discouraged. This doesn't seem any different to me than any other war that is commonly started with the definite article, such as The War of 1812 or The Spanish–American War. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Starting an article with "the" is not discouraged where it is appropriate to do so, as WP:THE makes clear. "Fronde" is simply a French noun and "the" serves an obvious function is distinguishing the historical event from its other uses - the comparison is not the War of 1812 but the Holocaust. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:24, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The Holocaust is an interesting example. But in that particular case, I can see why the article title would be at "The Holocaust" because in English "a holocaust" has become a generic term for a genocide. In contrast, "a fronde" is not an English term for anything, so the definite article is not needed in this title. Rreagan007 (talk) 03:51, 14 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - WP:THE is surely applicable here - cf (e.g.) The Anarchy. Ingratis (talk) 17:00, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Fronde which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 04:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)