Talk:Nord-Pas de Calais

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	France Portal Nord-Pas de Calais 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.

Please note that the correct French spelling of the région's name is Nord-Pas de Calais, and not Pas-de-Calais. The département of Pas-de-Calais, on the other hand, is spelled with hyphens, but not the région. Confusing I know. Hardouin 16:56, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

I would humbly disagree with this. According to this website, which appears to be the official French government agency for setting regional names, the région name is Nord-Pas-de-Calais. Do you have a different source for your information? I would like to reverse the roles of the Nord-Pas de Calais and Nord-Pas-de-Calais pages, i.e. make the first a redirect to the second. Currently, the second redirects to the first. Any comments would be welcome. Kiwipete 21:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Check the Nord-Pas de Calais regional council website: www.cr-npdc.fr. Hardouin 12:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

The regional council's webmaster is wrong : fr:Pas de Calais is the Strait of Dover and fr:Pas-de-Calais is the french département. So, the correct spelling is fr:Nord-Pas-de-Calais as official INSEE says. heMmeR 05:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

It's not the webmaster, it's the official name used by the région in all its documents. FYI the département Pas-de-Calais is spelled with hyphens, but the région Nord-Pas de Calais does not use the hyphens. Hardouin 10:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Still, I think you have quoted a website that is not the official source of French regional names. I believe that INSEE is the proper reference site. Kiwipete 08:56, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

This is a rare case where French authorities disagree with each other on proper spelling. I would suggest using the regional council spelling (the one already used in this article), which is the one most often found. The INSEE spelling is less often seen. Hardouin 21:53, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History

Currently we say

It was annexed to the Spanish Netherlands in 1598, having been offered as part of a wedding dowry.

To this I say "Huh?" What on earth is this referring to? Nord was part of the Netherlandish provinces of Flanders and Hainaut, and was always part of the Spanish Netherlands, and before that, the Burgundian Netherlands. Artois, which forms the majority of Pas-de-Calais, was part of the Burgundian Netherlands, was briefly taken over by Louis XI in 1477, but then reverted to Burgundy in 1492 or so (I think), as Charles VIII's bribe to the Habsburgs to remain neutral in his invasion of Italy. It thenceforth remained part of the Burgundian/Spanish Netherlands until it was annexed by France in 1659. The Boulonnais, which forms most of the rest of the Pas-de-Calais department, was French from 1477 on, at least. And Calais itself was French after 1558. So what on earth are we talking about? john k 15:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree the description of the history of this region is very France/Paris-centric. I made some changes to make it more balanced but it is certainly not correct as of yet. The forced cultural assimilation of the Flemish people was not mentioned anywhere. OK, I did not want to go as far as call it ethnic cleansing, but their hardship should be mentioned. The claim that this was an a French region originally that was then conquered by the Spanish Netherlands and then taken back by France is false - let's be friendly to Paris and say it was a European region but the culture and language were clearly Flamish (Dutch) until France started its cultural assimilation programme. Even today it is a sensitive point because Paris continues to refuse to recognize Dutch as an official minority language. Nevertheless the region still has a local radio station and some educational programs which are in Flemish/Dutch but it is all run by volunteers. JGG 17:51, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that I said that the history of the region was France/Paris-centric. With the exception of French Hainaut, the whole area was part of the Kingdom of France throughout the Middle Ages, until Flanders and Artois ceased to be (even theoretically) French fiefs by the Treaty of Cambrai in 1529. As to Flemishness, I don't know what you're talking about. Maritime Flanders (i.e., the area around Dunkirk) was certainly Flemish-speaking, but "Walloon Flanders" certainly was not, nor was Artois or French Hainaut (or the Boulonnais). Describing the whole region as having formerly had a Flemish culture is completely inaccurate. All but Maritime Flanders were French speaking from at least late medieval times, which was well before any French program of cultural assimilation began (which would not be, I think, until the 19th century). john k 18:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes I agree I oversimplify. However - do you think my changes in the text improve it or deteriorate it? JGG 18:28, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I believe that the comments in the history section reflecting the linguistic boundary in this région do not represent a Neutral Point of View and that they are biased toward Flemish Nationalism.

For starters, the characterization of the région as completely Dutchophone is incorrect and it is not supported by the linked resource. At the period when the linguistic boundary was furthest west, the 9th century, it ran from the mouth of the Canch to where the River Lys intersects with the modern Belgian border. This reflects less than half of the surface area of the région and does not include the largest cities at that period, most notably Lille. By the 14th century the line had moved north to where the river Lys intersects the Belgian border and east to the Cap-Griz-Nez and only covered about 1/4 of the région.

I am also going to use this juncture to mention that it is very dangerous to use the word "historically" to tie fluid populations and customs to static pieces of land. Using the word in this fashion implies that history has a moment of prime acquisition after which all changes are corruptions of this ideal moment. Invariably, we choose the moment of acquisition to be that moment when the group to which we are sympathetic (the dutchophones, in this case) had its greatest influence (the 9th century, in this case). Such statements are frequently (though very often unknowingly) used to support a spurious claim by one group of people to land or resources currently controlled by another. Saying that this région is historically dutchophone is about as truthful and meaningful as saying "historically, this is a celtophone region."

I intend to edit that statement. Take care -Matthew Hawker 19:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Demographics

I also believe that in addition to the problem in the history section the assertion in the demographics section that the French administration has continuously oppressed the Flemmish minority culture and language violates the wikipedia's NPOV doctrine.

This statement fails recognize that the vast majority of the shift in the language border preceded any active attempt to bring this about, and indeed even a "French administration." Instead, it appears to mostly be a result of "natural" linguistic border shifting of much the same process that brought the Flemmish language into the area to begin with. The French government's current stance is simply one of indifference, not active oppression (according to the EC).

There are two periods in history (that I am aware of) where the central French government took active steps to discourage the use of minority languages in general and Flemish in particular, the most significant being the period of national consolodation after their revolution. However this statement fails to couch the French actions vis-à-vis lingustic minorities during and after their revolution in their historical context: that the new government had concluded that the best way to ensure national unity in the transition from a (somewhat) feudal system which justified its existance with the person of the monarch to a democratic state justifying its existance based on the doctrine of the nation-state. In short, there was a very real need to create a homogenous nation for this new state, and the powers at the time decided to use language to do this (which I might note is a much better selection than, say, race). The Flemish were not singled out. All dialects in France were subject to this policy, including the Picard language in this région which is absent from the above statement.

I intend to edit that page to reflect what I beleive to be an NPOV. Take care, -Matthew Hawker 19:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Flag

Could either of the people currently edit waring over the flag please provide a reference for the flag they deem official. Note, I've seen photos of the ugly (logo style) new one, which is why I decided to revert to it, but it would be better to have a source to back it up as it seems to be disputed.--Caranorn 19:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Here is the source: [1]. This website also contains the flags of the other French regions. Godefroy 13:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)