Talk:History of Brittany

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Too much prehistory, not enough modern history!

What are accelerator dates?? Jaberwocky6669 04:01, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

Dun Breaton & Coel Hen. -- This is the English Wikipedia. Generally, reference works should be listed in English, so that others can check your work. As well, Wikipedia is not a general Bibliography. Are those works cited in creating the current article? Thats what "reference" means, the article cites those works. If there is not allready a Breton language Wikipedia, you are free to create one. Your message on my talk page is improper behavior on Wikipedia and cause for concern. Stbalbach 02:46, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Dun Breaton & Coel Hen. .. you have left another lengthy and bizzare message on my talk page. Is there some reason we can not discuss this article on the article discussion page? Is there some reason you must call me names, violating the rules of Wikipedia civil conduct? Is there some reason you believe the English Wikipedia must have a lengthy biography of non-English works? I understand you are very emotional about this topic, I might suggest calming down and take it easy and discuss this like an adult. Stbalbach 19:41, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Support User:Stbalbach. I doubt that some of the works cited have been used in the writing of the article. Unfortunately more effort appears to be going in to adding bibliographic references for very old sources of dubious value than in to more actually informative content in the article - especially in the modern period, which is somewhat threadbare at the moment. Man vyi 14:45, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

of dubious value : you are totally wrong. old sources : 1991, 1994, 1996 ? I don't want start such ridiculous polemic.

Old sources:

1. Dom Lobineau Histoire de Bretagne, 2 vol. in-folio.,Paris,veuve Muguet, 1707.
2. Dom Morice et Dom Taillandier Histoire de Bretagne, 2 vol. in-folio.,Paris,veuve Delaguette, 1750-1756.
3. Dom Morice et Dom Taillandier Mémoires pour servir de preuves à l'Histoire de Bretagne, 3 vol. in-folio.,Paris,Ch.Osmont, 1742-1746.

Have these C18th publications genuinely been consulted in the writing of the article? If so, then they should be listed so that the sources can be verified. If you can give no such assurance, then I submit they are of dubious value (putting it politely) and should be weeded out. What should not be removed, please, are other users' comments on this talk page. Man vyi 18:56, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

---

Not but listen a little it should be calmed and not to irritate you thus like that. We are not in a specialized Hospital. Dom Lobineau and Dom Morice are the best Histories of Brittany never written, they are the true ones monuments. If you have good sources, please write. And about the reference to the writings I do not have the time of me to occupy some immediately but wait a little and that’s come. And you know for the moment there is practically only “Prehistory” on the page in a territory which was not yet Bretagne but Armorica. If you remove these sources I remove also all that I wrote elsewhere. And all this would not positive for all.

Llyvarc' h Hen.

If I understand you correctly, you have not so far used these sources for your contributions to the article, but you intend to add information informed by these sources at some time in the future? Man vyi 06:36, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

__________________________________________________________________

Exactly.Moreover this bibliography gives a quite good idea of the panorama of Breton Historiography along the centuries and that can be very appreciated per many people curious about the History of Brittany;These sources are also a considerable enrichment for this page and are a source of ideas of works for researchers.

Llyvarc' h Hen.

__________________________________________________________________

[edit] Move prehistoric sections?

What say we move all of the sections up to and including that on the Bronze age to Prehistory of Brittany (or even Prehistory of Armorica)? QuartierLatin 1968 01:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Armorica is an historical name related by greek and roman authors. One can say that this name could have been in use before the roman invasion by the gallic tribes and that would give him a protohistoric age, but not a prehistoric one. As anyone thougth of moving the "prehistory of Russia" to the section "prehistory of Sarmatia?"Le gludic 03:08, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay, that's a fair point against the name Armorica. My point though was to suggest moving the prehistorical material to an article on prehistory. Any thoughts on that? QuartierLatin 1968 18:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lexilogos blocked by spam filter

This website was blocked by Wikipedia's apparently overzealous spam filter: www.lexilogos.com/bretagne_drapeau.htm . It's a pretty inoccuous page about the history of the Breton flag. QuartierLatin1968 17:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)