Talk:Committee of Public Safety
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Committee of Public Safety is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses. | |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a group devoted to the the study, and improvement of Wikipedia articles on the subject, of History. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | ||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||||||
|
|||||||
Contents |
[edit] Huh?
I believe that the following has no bearing in reality, so I cut it from the article. Am I missing something?
- The four policies of the Committee of Public Safety were:
- Married men will make weapons, transport military supplies, and prepare food.
- Young men will fight.
- Children will make old cloth into lint.
- Women will forget the futile tasks.
-- Jmabel | Talk 06:36, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
These "policies" were actually part of the Levée en masse, a law put into effect by the Committee of Public Safety in 1794.
-Moonbeast 22:10, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- That makes sense. It made no sense in the context where it was placed in the article a year ago. We have some OK, not great, material at Levée en masse#The_French_Revolutionary_Wars. Is this quotation accurate and citable? If so, it should probably be added there. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
"The Committee for Public Safety was responsible for the beheading of The King of France." This could not be possible since the king was executed in January 1793, but the Committee of Public Safety was not established until 6 April 1793. Therefore, I have deleted this phrase from the first paragraph. More accuracy and content is necessary to make this article more reliable and useful. Perhaps once I have finished my papers this month, I will lend a hand in fleshing it out: my current paper is on the Committee and its rise to power, and so my research will make me a bit more knowledgeable on the topic. BTW, I either need to sign up for an account or remember the username and password to my old one. -- 10 March 2007
[edit] References
R. R. Palmer's Twelve Who Ruled and Georg Buchner;s: Danton's Death were recently moved from "further reading" to references. Does this mean someone has actually used them as references? I honestly don't see the sense in which Buchner's play would be a reference. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:06, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Calendars
Can we stick with one calendar throughout the article? Either the Republican Calendar (with corresponding Gregorian dates listed) or the Gregorian alone will do, but every member's term should be in the same system. Mdotley 16:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'm lost on what the problem is. The only place I see Republican dates is when we say "after 9 Thermidor", which is to say "after the fall of Robespierre et. al." - Jmabel | Talk 03:22, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] merge
merge away! Gomm 17:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed! Carillonatreides 02:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Done. -Arch dude 00:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Stub
This page really isn't that informative, shouldn't the stub modifier be attached to it? Carillonatreides 02:40, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Weak
The sections on "Accomplishments of the Committee of Public Safety" and "Failures of the Committee of Public Safety" are so weak that I'm not sure I'd even give them a passing grade in a high school paper, and certainly not in anything past that level. Does someone want to take this on? - Jmabel | Talk 05:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Very weak, the "accomplishments" are anything but, unless you define any action you succeed in taking as an accomplishment no matter how negative the results. "Creation of a war dictatorship" and price controls which result in increases shortage of basic necessities are hardly what I would consider accomplishments. Twfowler 19:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cutting editorial comment to the TalkPage
I cut the following editorial comment to this TalkPage
====== Begin editorial comment
this article dont give enough information....
====== End editorial comment --Rednblu 18:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Accomplishments and Failures?
What rule was used to decide whether certain effects were "accomplishments" or "failures"? Everything listed in the "accomplishments" section seems just as disastrous and unsavory... Adam Lein 05:47, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Biased
This article seems kind of biased by using the word "failures". Who are we to judge if killing thousands of people is a "failure", or if it save France. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.237.242 (talk) 02:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I believe the failures title should be removed and all under it be put into actions - there will be no bias that way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.197.235 (talk) 06:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
