Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:35, 2 January 2013

To-do list for Marseille: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2006-10-31 Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Political history Expand : Culture and Music

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Cities This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. France: French communes Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the scope of WikiProject French communes, a project which is currently considered to be inactive. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Misplaced Pages's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:V0.5

Name

(The English spelling "Marseilles" is falling out of usage.) The French person who wrote this is misinformed. Just google 'Marseilles'. So French! Imagine an American telling a Frenchman that the right spelling of Versailles was "Versaille." Many French spell New York "New-York." We never correct them, because it absolutely doesn't matter. Wetman 20:58, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I'd say they were right. The spelling with an -s was always a bit bizarre and etymologically unjustified, and I have never heard anyone actually say Marseilles (the -s would be pronounced in English). Chameleon 13:33, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I think it important to remember that a number of places, particularly in France, have a long history and through much of that history they have been fought over by different armies who called cities, in some cases, by slightly different names. To say that Marseilles is etymologically unjustified depends who was calling it, when. What did Eisenhower call it when he did a deal with the local mafia to side with the allies? I bet it was Marseilles. There are many glaring examples of places in France where foreign meeja and others seem to have the right to decide what places are called in different languages, and thereby ignore a long and interesting history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drg40 (talk • contribs) 08:49, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

So the "s" in Lyons would be pronounced too, then? On a cheerier note, I was just coming back to suggest to more knowledgeable Wikipedians that this stubby entry could be expanded by referring to "What links here." Many suggestions there. Wetman 07:41, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'd be much obliged to Wetman if he could stop making country-wide generalizations ("so French!" etc.). David.Monniaux 19:32, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Particularly since I have also written (and had it reverted) that "Marseilles" is falling out of usage...and I'm English, not French. For the record, I haven't seen the terminal "-s" in publications for many years, except in very old travel guides. There isn't a terminal "-s" in Lyon either, so I'm not sure what all that is about. Ah well, Americans always did hold to old-fashioned spellings longer than anyone else (yes, that was indeed another sweeping generalisation ;)) -- Necrothesp 01:59, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Cours Julien I thought it would be nice to add the "cours julien" on the "sights" section. Unfortunely I haven´t got a photo to upload.. If anyone does...

I will be visiting Marseille in early April 2006, so I'll try to update this page especially in terms of photos when I get back. What is the Cours Julien? I'll try to get a photo of it if I can. User:Adrian.Denegar

FWIW, I have heard the pronunciation of roughly mah-sales for Marseilles, but only in UK English. I can't say if that's considered an acceptable alternative in the UK, but it sounds very uneducated from a North American perspective. However, UK English is often much more extreme in Anglicizing foreign names and words than North American English -- e.g. pasta with the first vowel as in past, pastel with stress on first syllable, etc.

But WRT spelling, Google (English-only) returns 21 million for Marseille and 6 million for Marseilles. (Removing language preference changes it to 63 million vs. 6.5 million.) So the current article title Marseille is quite appropriate. There is a general but very gradual trend in English to reduce arbitrary alterations to foreign names (e.g., writing the French king Lewis XV or Frankfort for Frankfurt-am-Main.) Tkinias 14:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

It's not just an English thing. There's a general trend in this globalizing world for people just to take verbatim the names that other people give themselves, in their own language, wherever practical. Fwiw, I don't mind us retaining English *names* for foreign places (Florence rather than Fiorenza, Cologne rather than Köln...), but broken English spellings that are just historical accidents...no thanks. Ok, I live in Lyon so I'm even more biased, but think that Misplaced Pages should be aiming to educate, rather than reinforce mistakes. Florence is a logical anglicisation. Cologne is understandable (Köln uses an unknown consonant cluster in English), Marseilles...no justification. Stevage 14:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Ooops. You're going to have a bit of a problem in your argument with Rheims and Reims, where the long and honorable history (including Joan of Arc) of people who fought over Rheims vs Reims for many bitter years means that even the people who live there now call it Rheims in English. Mind you, the way that the French pronounce "Reims", and the subtle inflections, means that even if an Englishman wanted to say "Reims" (vaguely "Rance", but don't go there) he might as well not bother. Drg40 (talk) 14:20, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I actually searched for this page buy typing in Marseilles (I am English and pronounce this exactly the same as you would 'Marseille'.) So there is at least one English speaker who uses this alternative spelling! :) Jonwood1 17:27, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

It will be Roma next. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:46, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

This change was noted 80 years ago in Modern English Usage (or maybe later in The King's English). Fowler also noted that the French pronunciation was replacing the English, so I assume the s had commonly been pronounced. It is inconsistent (why not Roma, after all?), but usage is inconsistent. I still spell it with an s, but I'm a way old fart. John FitzGerald 22:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Stevage, what in the world made you think that Florence's italian name was Fiorenza? I don't even see it on Google. It is Firenze, of course. I have noticed other cases where anglosaxons use another spelling of a city's name thinking it's the original, like in Genoa(Italy). Genoa is correct in Ligurian Italian, but not in Toscan Italian, which is the "standard" Italian nowadays. The correct spelling is Genova.--Stormy Ordos 16:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Tkinias, in the UK Marseilles is pronounced 'Mar-say' - a slight anglicisation, but understandable as our vowels differ from those available in French. I have never ever heard anyone say 'Mar-sales' in the UK, or anywhere outside the US, for that matter. I think your comment about British English speakers having a greater tendency to Anglicise is also inaccurate - of course we do anglicise some things, but so do other English speaking communities. To suggest it is less common in the States is wrong, I'd say. I would even suggest that the opposite is true. Incidentally, the Italians pronounce 'pasta' as 'pаsta', not 'pahsta', as it is sometimes heard in the US. I don't think it matters too much how you pronounce things as long as everyone understands what you mean to say, but I thought I'd just clarify this point. Potahto (talk) 10:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you're right. People in the UK also pronounce Avignon and Arles more or less correctly, but Aix is often pronounced "aches" rather than "ex" :) (The pronunciation of Buoux in the Luberon is far more interesting...) Mathsci (talk) 11:02, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

My late grandmother (b.1926) pronounced it "Mah sales". She was a middle class southerner and knew a reasonable amount of French, although like most women of her generation, she wasn't a university graduate. 86.150.11.150 (talk) 14:28, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Massilia

I've piped the redirect for Massilia to Marseille#Ancient. Could I have a hand in adding a Massilia link to any pages about ancient history mentioning Massilia where there is no Massilia link? Neddyseagoon 19:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)neddyseagoon

A few days ago, I added a disamb that has been removed. The wiki Massilia redirects to Marseille. However, there is a boat with the same name and the article The Vichy 80, refers to it. Maybe your guys could find a way to have a disamb. Tony 04:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

White Space

Is there a way to make it so there isn't a huge white space between the header for the History section and the actual start of the text in the section? I haven't played with Misplaced Pages enough to know how to do that, and I don't want to use this article as a sandbox.ONUnicorn 16:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

There's always the "preview" button. However, I don't see a "huge white space"? There's an expansion template...if there's too much space around it for your liking, delete one or two of the carriage returns? Stevage 14:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

New Infobox Template proposition

I'd like to bring your attention to a new - or other - version of the "Large French Cities" infobox presently at use in a few French cities pages. The present version is much too large, partly because it consecrates too much space to information having little importance to French demography and an only distant and indirect relevence to the city itself. Instead I propose to follow a less cumbersome model closer to that used by the New York City article - you can view the new version in the Paris talk page here. Please view and comment. THEPROMENADER 22:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

As a result of some discussion over the past weeks, there is an updated template available for perusal in its 'published ' form (filled with data) here - all comments welcome. -- THEPROMENADER 07:26, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Temperature Oddity

It seems odd that Marsielle's(s') July temperature would average around the 20s considering its location. Is the section on temperatures correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonwood1 (talk • contribs)

It is the average temperature, not the average high temperature. --Bob 18:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I added a table displaying the averages across the year from weatherbase.

I added the population status in Marseilles which may be very helful in some cases —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.153.43 (talk) 18:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

a visit to marseille

I visited marseille this summer during a tour in southern europe. Unfortunately, i have to say that it is the filthiest city in Europe!!! It's a great pity that a city with such a great history and fantastic old buildings is left totally abandoned! All the streets are full of garbage, there is a terrible smell everywhere, especially near the old port, and even large chains of fast food like mc donalds,haagen dazs etc are also extremely dirty. I don't think that any European traveller will enjoy the stay in Marseille.

--- This comment should be removed or seriously moderated. It is up to european, or any travelers to decide whether they enjoy marseille or not. Broad, generalist statements like this one are not useful in a encycopdic entry. At the moment the city is undergoing a massive urban reconstruction program, leaving many parts of the city looking like a construction site. One of the goals is to change public transportation by building a tramway line, that is currently (oct 2006) still being constructed and is planned to start running in June 2007. Marseille could be undergoing a similar reconstruction phase that Barcelona went through after the olympic games in 1992.

The fact is, Marseille is alive. You may be a kind of homo sapiens used only to orthogonal roads and orthogonal countries, but it is up to every human, every fish and every macdonald's to decide whether he enjoys the second capital of France. --Stormy Ordos 16:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

It's just funny to see that you consider Marseille as the second capital of France, since it is absolutly not the case (not the second largest population, not the the second largest economy, not the second largest cultural area...). Anyway, that's true the city is dirty, but things are changing in a good way. 22 sept 2007

Of course, it is the second most populous commune in France after Paris. Paris has 2,1 million inhabitants where Marseille has around 0,8 million. I'm talking of communes not agglomérations which are bascically taking all the region. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Farigoule (talk • contribs) 10:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

crime

This page is sorely lacking a paragraph about crime statistics in a city that has become known as a problem spot for criminal activity in France. Someone should consider digging up relevant statistics that will turn this page into something other than an advertisement by the city's tourism center.

Yes crime is big in Marseille, but unbeknown to most, Cannes has the highest crime rate in France. Whodda thought. --Bob 16:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Racial crime is huge here, most non-moslems are leaving because the new immigrants are not acting civilized. shops are closing very early. and the people are scared. especially the large Jewish population which is being attacked by the north african moslems. so cannes might have a high petty crime rate but Marseille has serious crime problems (attacking Juifs especially (and white French less so) by growing )moslem population. //screamtoasigh//

Is it me that find this commentory racist? Or is it racist ? Could you support your comment by numbers ?

It is, and untrue. The comments such as shops are closing very early. and the people are scared have no place in Misplaced Pages. Marseille suffers from crime, it's true. But, to my mind, it suffers much more from those absurd ideas and its general bad reputation. But prejudices are deeply rooted in people's mind. --Franchute 07:52, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Demographics

I'd like to remove the sentence : As a result, the ethnic French are a minority. There is not such thing as Ethnic French. There is more difference between people from Provence and people from the north of France than between them and Italians for instance. But as this might lead to a controversy, I'd like some consensus before doing it. --cperroquin

Without any comment, I will replace the existing chapter on Demographics with this one. I add a table to explain the change in population. Cperroquin 15:29, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

=== Immigrants ===

Marseille has always been a city of immigrants. In 1900, half of the population is originating from elsewhere (, , or ...). As France's largest sea port, Marseille experienced a massive demographic growth as a result of the thousands of immigrants arriving during the 20th century. Italians and Greeks around 1900, after 1915 and 1923, in 1917, Spanish after 1936, North-African Arabs and Berbers, notably from Algeria, after the First World War and after 1950, Subsahara Africans after 1950, after 1962. Today, many Marseillais are descendants of the waves of immigrants.The largest ethnic groups in the city are Italian who make up 37.5% of the population. Other significant communities include North African Arabs and Berbers (25% of the total population), and Armenians (12.5% of the total population ). It is estimated that roughly a quarter of the population are from non-foreign ascendancy. Other significant immigrant groups include people of Turkish, Greek, German and Vietnamese origins. Marseille’s 80,000-strong Jewish community is also said to be the third largest in Europe (France has the largest Jewish community in Europe and the fourth largest in the world, after the United States, Israel and Russia))

Why not just translate what's on the french WP page? It seems to strike the right balance, although the comments on remedies to population decline probably belong in the economy section. It also has 1800 where you have 1900: which is correct? You single out the jewish community - the french WP article describes all religious groups. I think taking a positive attitude is best: Marseille as a "cosmopolitan melting pot" because of its unique pre-eminence as one of the main entry points to France from the south. (Should the many people sans papiers be mentioned?) Just a few random thoughts. To avoid offense, I think talking about the country of origin is better than talking about ethnicity; and all religions should be discussed if judaism is to be mentioned. Here is my slightly amplified translation of the french entry:

Because of its pre-eminence as a mediterranean port, Marseille has always been one of the main points of entry into France. This has attracted many settlers and made Marseille into a unique cosmopolitan melting pot. Already at the end of the 18th century about half the population originated from elsewhere. The main group of immigrants came from Italy (mainly from Genoa and Piedmont) as well as from Spain, Greece and the Middle East.

Economic conditions and political unrest in Europe and the rest of the world brought several further waves of immigrants in the 20th century: greeks and italians started arriving already at the end of the 19th century; russians in 1917; armenians in 1915 and 1923; the spanish after 1936; north africans in the inter-war period;sub-saharan africans after 1945; and the pieds-noirs, from the former french colonies in Algeria, in 1962.

Currently over one third of the population of Marseille can trace their roots back to Italy, the most represented country in the city, even beyond France. Marseille also has the largest Corsican and second largest Armenian population in France. After catholicism, the other major religions practised in Marseille are islam (200,000, a quarter of the population), judaism (80,000, making Marseille the third largest urban jewish community in Europe), ] (50,000) and buddhism (10,000).

Mathsci 01:02, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

100% Agree with you. I was trying to do a mix between existing informations and the French Page... For religion, I've got 600 000 catholics, 150 000 à 200 000 muslims, 80 000 Armenians, 80 000 jews, 20 000 protestants, 10 000 orthodoxes et 3 000 bouddhists. This came from http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/article-imprim.php3?id_article=39997 . I kept ethnicity because of his preeminence in English language but I'm in favor of removing it. Your translation of Levantin in Middle East is subject to controversy... I was using Near East that is quite unusual in English but can't find a better translation... Cperroquin 08:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

If the Middle East is too general, you could say "the Levant", which sounds fine in english. Why not incorporate my translation with your more up to date statistics and references? --Mathsci 09:10, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Because of its pre-eminence as a mediterranean port, Marseille has always been one of the main points of entry into France. This has attracted many immigrants and made Marseille into a unique cosmopolitan melting pot. Already at the end of the 18th century about half the population originated from elsewhere. The main group of immigrants came from Italy (mainly from Genoa and Piedmont) as well as from Spain, Greece and the Levant.

Economic conditions and political unrest in Europe and the rest of the world brought several further waves of immigrants in the 20th century: greeks and italians started arriving already at the end of the 19th century; russians in 1917; armenians in 1915 and 1923; the spanish after 1936; north africans in the inter-war period; sub-saharan africans after 1945; and the pieds-noirs, from the former french colonies in Algeria, in 1962.

Currently over one third of the population of Marseille can trace their roots back to Italy, the most represented country in the city, even beyond France. Marseille also has the largest Corsican and second largest Armenian population in France. The main religions practised in Marseille are Catholicism (600 000) Islam (between 150,000 and 200,000), Armenian Apostolic Church (80,000), Judaism (80,000, making Marseille the third largest urban jewish community in Europe), Protestantism (20,000), Eastern Orthodoxy (10,000) and Buddhism (3,000).

Et, voilà !, I also moved settlers to immigrants. Cperroquin 17:01, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Minor changes: armenians -> Armenian Orthodoxism, Eastern Orthodoxy -> Eastern Orthodoxism, 600 000 -> 600,000; otherwise fine (except for some possible errors I made with upper/lower case). Why not substitute this passage with the editorial comment that it now conforms to the more fully researched french page? --Mathsci 22:28, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Just FYI, the term in English is Orthodoxy not Orthodoxism. Orthodoxism could be seen as pejorative (like Islam, Islamism...). For Armenians, I moved to Armenian Apostolic Church. The use of Orthodoxy for Armenians is subject to controversy. I'm going to update the main page... Cperroquin 13:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm bothered by the listing of "main religions" where Christianity is divided into several branches (and each treated as a different religion?) whereas Islam, Judaism, etc. are not divided (correctly). Perhaps Christianity needs one statistic (as one religion) and then, if it should be divided into sections, another sentence could be introduced to show the divisions? Nolan Belk (talk) 01:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Demographics are out of date. use 2008 statistics perhaps? Alexandre8 (talk) 22:14, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Images

The article is overloaded with images and has huge visual gaps because there are too many images. A gallery would be far more suited to the article; it would still display the excellent photos of the article and allow for greater expansion of an image collection of Marseille. I will put it on my to do list but perhaps instead someone would like to make a gallery and tidy up the format of the article in general?

I have created a gallery to make the page a lot tidier and have added some information, mainly on the economy and population.LordHarris 11:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Ive also wrote a bit and tidied up the history section. LordHarris 13:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I have recently visited Marseille and have expanded most of the sections. I have written a new section on geography, extended the history and the sights section and have edited the sights section by location to make it more readable. I have amended the assessment scale of the article from a start class article to a B class article since it is too comprehensive to be only a start class article. LordHarris 11:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I can see that there is a number of thumbnails with enforced sizes - both large and small. Since there is a user-configurable option for thumbnail sizes, I believe that thumbnails should generally be included without forced sizes. That way, people with large screens will be able to increase the size, whereas people with small screens (e.g. subnotebooks) can decrease the size. Comments, anyone? --JDrewes 00:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Economy

I have three small problems with the economy section: Firstly, while the Port of Marseille is the biggest in France, and possibly he Med, in terms of size, it has fallen from the top spot in terms of goods passing through each year - Barcelona and Genoa having become arguably more important. Even with in France, Le Havre is catching up with Marseille. The city's Dockers and their penchant for la grève (strike) have undermined the ports reliability.

Based on AAPA data, for the total tonnage, Marseille is still the third port in Europe after Rotterdam and Antwerpen. But you're right that on container tonnage is behind Le Havre or Barcelona. For Passenger traffic, the most important one in France (may be Europe) is Calais Check this : http://www.aapa-ports.org/Industry/content.cfm?ItemNumber=900&navItemNumber=5

Secondly, I was always of the impression that Nice and Lyon airports were in fact busier than that of Marseille-Maringane, which has no non-European destinations other than those to the Maghreb and Dakar.- the airport has also just built a new 'Budget' terminal to attract more flights from the likes of Ryanair, hardly the sign of a booming airport.

Thirdly, the translation of Marseille Provence Metropolis is clearly wrong - what would be a better English rendering? Having spent a year there last year, I have to say that the city is not as straightforward as the tourist brochure which we see just now on this page - that's what makes it so exciting and unique, if not exactly beautiful. AlenWatters 21:42, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Pytheas

If anyone happens to be in Marseille could they please take a photo of the statue of Pytheas and put it on this article. Thanks.

Hi, ive got several photos of statues that I took in Marseille, though I dont know what they are though I know where I took them, so I might have a photo if you can tell me where the statue is? LordHarris 23:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to Marseille tonight, where is that statue ? (I guess at the Bourse)--Franchute 07:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Citoyen Kane

What are the locals called? (Don't say French. ;)) Trekphiler 01:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

they are called Marseillais and Marseillaises. --Franchute 07:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup, mon ami. Alex Trebek 22:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Modifications to caption

Hello, JDrewes. I'm just recopying the message I left on your talk page; I hope you don't mind. Thank you for your new caption. The address of the Petit Nice is 7 rue des Braves in the telephone directory (pages jaunes). In my Gault Millau they just write "corniche JF Kennedy, Anse de Maldorme". When I look at a large scale Plan Guide Blay-Foldex map of Marseille I see that it is indeed on the Corniche which starts considerably before there. I've seen this view from a car, from the 83 bus and from a yacht on the bay. Of course you are absolutely right that what you see directly in the picture is the Petit Nice with the two islands Frioul and Chateau d'If much further away on the horizon (they appear much better if the thumbnail is clicked). I therefore have taken your better caption with a slight addition. If you'd rather, the caption « View of "Petit Nice" on the Corniche with Frioul and Chateau d'If in the background » would be another alternative. (I'm not even sure whether this isn't an aerial picture, it's hard to judge.) I have been working on the Aix-en-Provence page (heat permitting) and added images there, but I think I'm going to get a friend with a digital camera to take some better ones. Do you have any thoughts? --Mathsci 14:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi! When I wrote "Petit Nice", I actually meant the entire peninsula (with the "Petit Nice" establishment on it). AFAIK, the Marseillaise refer to that as little Nice. Of course I think it is perfectly adequate to add the names of the islands in the background. I have a camera and I live in Marseille. If you want pictures of anything in particular (in the general Marseille area, including Aix, but I can't go there every day), just tell me so, I like to take pictures. :-) I also just added a panoramic view on Marseille from Notre Dame de la Garde to the german "Marseille"-page, and I am considering to embed it in the english version - opinions?JDrewes 12:31, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I chose the picture because of the islands;)

Your picture is very nice, but please could you make it into a clickable thumbnail on the german WP page? It seems a bit large at the moment. It would be nice to add pictures of Marseille from the sea in the bay showing the waterfront, the surrounding hills, pieds-noir buildings, etc. (Have you been out on a yacht?) IMO these are some of the best views of Marseille. Also, if you have photos of the complete 360 degree set of views from Notre Dame de La Garde, they would make an excellent thumbnail series for the gallery. --Mathsci 18:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I chose the "large image" style because it is the only automatically scaling template for images (or isn't it?). Is there a way to scale the image to always be exactly the current viewers screen width? --JDrewes 00:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

User:angr

For unknown reasons, this editor has expressed his personal point of view on illustrations in this article. Rather than raising his objections here to the inclusion of the poster of the French Connection, illustrating the "films made in Marseille" section, he has tried to make a procedural objection elsewhere on the WP. That was quite incorrect on his part. Now he wants the picture of the recently deceased Marseille-born opera singer Regine Crespin removed. This is an autographed photo from a blog; here he is pushing a copyright issue. Please could he discuss these points here, rather than on my talk page? Mathsci 19:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Since the movie poster is non-free, use of it has to follow WP:NFCC. The use of the image here failed #8 because it was just illustrating a list, and not did not "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic". The other image is listed at IFD and the discussion should be taken there. Rettetast 22:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The image of Regine Crespin is available at flickr , a site used by User:angr himself for uploading an image for Yo-Yo Ma here . The film poster seems to me just as informative as the plate of swordfish. It also indicates in a fairly subtle way that Marseille has a certain reputation for crime, something quite hard to put into words. --Mathsci 01:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Thumb sizes

Is there a particular reason we can't have the thumb sizes unspecified, as per the MoS? --Plangent 22:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

You did not wait for any discussion; a day or two would be a good idea, just because of time differences between editing zones. You also seem to be a new editor to WP articles on France. Please feel free to contribute content to this article. However, please do not just push your point of view on the look of articles. If you happen to have any photographs of Marseille, that would be great, particularly Marseille from the sea. Also take some time to review previous discussions about images on this page. Do you in fact live in France and do you speak French? --Mathsci 00:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I have read the conversations relating to the images. As far as I can see, no one has said that any of the image sizes must be specified. Moreover, the changes I've made have previously been suggested, with no comment indicating disagreement. In absence of any objections (other than knee-jerk reverts), it seems quite reasonable to follow the MoS on this one.

Of course, if there are specific images which need embiggened or otherwise, I'm quite willing to listen to the reasons. --Plangent 00:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

embiggened?? What kind of word is that? You didn't seek consensus and have acted quite arbitrarily and hastily. Do you want to be reported on WP:AN/I for disruptive editing and vandalism? --Mathsci 01:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

"Embiggened" is a colloquialism for "made larger".

And by all means, take this to AN/I. --Plangent 02:20, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

No, AN/I is not appropriate at the moment. I have enlarged the lead image, as in the WP:MOS. I have added an image of the Vieux-Port in the template (the image used on the French WP page). I have reversed the order of the painting of Estaque and the Opera House because the arrangement broke WP:MOS directives and skewed the headers in a quite unseemly way. I enlarged the picture of the port of Marseille as the lead picture for the long section on the Economy. As precedent I used the article on New York (one of the larger cities in the United States of America) where similar image scaling was used. Here I used the "common sense" part of the WP:MOS. I hope this is OK. --Mathsci 02:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

No arguments from me. --Plangent 02:58, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I think you might be what the French call "un petit emmerdeur" :-)--Mathsci 09:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

History, after Rome

This article states that Marseille "reverted to the Gauls" as Roman power declined, before joining the Franks. I've never seen anywhere else that Marseille was a free city before joining the Franks. Wasn't it taken by the Visigoths, then reverted back to Roman power, only to be captured by Odoacer or Theodoric the Ostrogoth? I didn't think the Franks took control of the city until after Theodoric's death. Thomas Lessman (talk) 21:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I think you're right: there is a chronology of Marseille on the french wikipedia. If you're a history expert, please check/correct the whole of the history section. --Mathsci (talk) 21:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Twin Towns

The twinning arrangements and the other trade agreements are taken from the official source of the Mairie de Marseille, provided in the main space article. The attributions of countries are exactly as specified there. The alphabetic order from the source has been respected. Several times WP editors have tried to place Glasgow at the head of the list, which has no justification. Equally well other editors have changed the declared country from Scotland to the UK. Here the country is taken as the country stated by the City of Marseille on the official page and copied from the deeds of agreement of 2006. User:58.179.79.215 (from Australia) has referred to "french ignorance" on my talk page . He/she is a recently arrived, quite inexperienced editor, who shows signs of being racist. Mathsci (talk) 16:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

There is no particular justification, so far as I can see, for maintaining the formatting used in the source. Sources are used to verify facts, not to determine how these facts are then relayed and displayed. I note you have reverted to the St Andrew's cross flag rather than the flag of the United Kingdom. Misplaced Pages's guidelines at WP:FLAGS are clear on this matter:

"In general, if a flag is felt to be necessary, it should be that of the sovereign state (e.g. the United States of America or Canada) not of a subnational entity, even if that entity is sometimes considered a "nation" or "country" in its own right."

"Subnational flags (regions, cities, etc.) should generally be used only when directly relevant to the article. Such flags are rarely recognizable by the general public, detracting from any shorthand utility they might have, and are rarely closely related to the subject of the article. For instance, the flag of Tampa, Florida, is appropriately used on the Tampa article. However, the Tampa flag should generally not be used on articles about residents of Tampa: it would not be informative, and it would be unnecessarily visually distracting."

The Scottish flag is not directly relevant to the city of Glasgow, and as such the primary flag used should be the national flag, that is the Union Jack. --Breadandcheese (talk) 01:34, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The only official source available for the twinning arrangements is the Mairie of Marseille. It lists Glasgow as being in Scotland (Ecosse). Please find another reliable source for the twinning arrangements if you want the country changed from Scotland to the UK. If it's just about the flag, why are you making such a big deal about it, given the clear context here? Cheers, Mathsci (talk) 02:25, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Are you asking me to furnish you with a source that Glasgow (and indeed Scotland) are in the United Kingdom? The source information is being transmitted; Misplaced Pages guidelines tell us how it is to be transmitted. I am making a 'big deal' out of it because it is blatantly in violation of those guidelines as well as being contrary to consistent practice and common sense. --Breadandcheese (talk) 14:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

No I am asking you to provide another official source for the twinning arrangement with Marseille which does not list the country in which Glasgow is as Scotland. Your crusade to remove the Scottish flag when Glasgow is listed as in Scotland seems disruptive. Please stop edit warring and instead consider adding some content to this encyclopedia. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 14:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Why should I do that? There is no dispute that Glasgow is in the United Kingdom, surely, so why are you suggesting I must source it? I find it rather offensive to be accused of going on a 'crusade' or indeed causing disruption when all I am doing is implementing agreed guidelines which have numerous good reasons to justify them - none of which I have heard disputed. Moreover, I am not edit warring, I am disputing content with what seems to me like perfectly good justification. As for adding content, I do my fair share of that: however that does not mean that I do not change things I feel to be wrong then pursue them if I feel someone is incorrectly altering that. I am no guideline zealot but I remind you per WP:EQ that talk pages are here so you can argue facts, not personalities. I hope we can move forward towards a real and satisfactory conclusion to this dispute, but I feel to do so you must clarify the terms of what you are actually disputing. --Breadandcheese (talk) 15:55, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Please have a look at the article "European Capital of Culture". It proposes one possible solution for this problem. --Stormy Ordos (talk) 11:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Tourist attractions and sites

I believe not every site in Marseille needs to be listed as per WP:NOT#TRAVEL , only the most prominent examples. Wikitravel may be another way to list these. Michellecrisp (talk) 06:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Which buildings or sites should be omitted and what criterion do you propose to use? The list does not appear to be overly long. 78.105.62.245 (talk) 08:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

History of Marseille

I am cleaning up the history section of Marseille using the encyclopedic 862 page book of Duchene and Contrucci, which I have added in a new references section. A number of small errors have crept in to the article. The French WP has an article on the Chronology of Marseille: this book contains a detailed chronology (pages 809-820), which could possibly be translated and, in shorter form, used as the basis of a separate wikipedia article. The complicated history of Marseille is certainly clarified by the French chronology page. Various anecdotes to which the recently arrived editor User:Michellecrisp has attached citation tags can easily be verified using this definitive source. Like me, she/he can now buy her own copy of this book(32 euros) or order it from her local library; that way she/he can avoid using unscholarly sources from the web and can check well-known facts about the Seige of Marseille herself/himself. The book is of course in French, as one might expect. Mathsci (talk) 09:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

It is obvious that I am female. Using a book as a source is fine, but page references are preferred as per http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:CITE#Provide_page_numbers Michellecrisp (talk) 15:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

The potted history in the article is not the only one. Indeed the plaque in the middle of the harbour in the city says that the Greeks captured the city from the Phonecians in about 660BC. The view in the city in 2006 was that Marseilles was of value because it stood at the mediterranean end of the tin and copper river route from N Europe and Britain. Being largely an area of marshland at or near the mouth of the Rhone, probably ridden with biting insects at that time it had to have more than merely a passing interest to be the subject of a pitched battle.

Clearly the river route from N to So france would be of some interest, especially since any N route up what is now the Portuguese coast is very unnatractive. As for any Biscay crossing....

There are now known to have been several trading cultures in the mediterranean long before the dates given for the peoples wo are mentioned in the article. The fact that these others are not reviewed suggests grave difficulties with the given view.

Trying to put this nicely, but putting this article with that on Corunna leads one to consider that perhaps these "histories" have more to do with American religious and political correctness than the state of current historical scholarship.

Drg40 (talk) 08:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

American political correctness? The main source for the history is a book written by two Marseillais.Mathsci (talk) 09:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I stand by that comment and offer you two sentences from the opening:

"and very recent excavations near the railway station have unearthed neolithic brick habitations from around 6,000 BC.

Marseille, the oldest city of France, was founded in 600 BC by Greeks from Phocaea"

Don't those sentences seem to you to be self contradictory? How can you "found" a city that's been a dwelling area for 6000 years? And why would you "found" a city in or near to an insect infested swamp in the first place, unless you valued the river near where it stands as a communications artery? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drg40 (talk • contribs) 15:01, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

The presence of neolithic settlements means that another part of current day Marseille was occupied before a trading post was established in antiquity. It's possibly worth pointing out that this talk page is not a forum for open-ended discussions. Articles are written by summarising the sources; that means books and academic articles for the history. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 18:26, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I love the thought that any refutation of your POV is "open ended discussion".

Journal of Mediterranean Geography, 104/2005: "A bracelet dated from the end of the 7th century BC and beginning of the 6th century BC seems to attest a continuous occupation until the arrival of Greeks (Hesnard et al., 1999)."

I would also draw to your attention that any book published in English with any hope of distibution in America WILL conform to US religious requirements. So simply saying that a book was written by two "Marsellais" actually tells me nothing about the demands the American censor has placed upon the authors, if any. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drg40 (talk • contribs) 09:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

The book is published in France and, unsurprisingly for a long history of Marseille, is in French. I bought my copy here in Aix-en-Provence on the cours Mirabeau. The excavation of the neolithic settlement from 6,000 BC in Marseille is recent and described on the web here (the link in the article). The sentence you quote was copy-pasted from this source which again says that Marseille was founded in 600 BC. There's no claim that the Ligurians and others weren't around before then. Archaeologically the Greek harbour stones can be dated (dans le jardin des vestiges) and of course there are all those ancient quarries at La Couronne, Bouches-du-Rhône further along the coast. Mathsci (talk) 13:34, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

"Formerly known as Massalia"

Is it necessary to state at the beginning of the introduction that the city is "formerly known as Massalia (from Greek: Μασσαλία)"? While that is technically true, we're not talking about a name in recent use, like Peking or Bombay. This city hasn't been called "Massalia" in over a millenium. Should we also note in the intro to Lyon that it used to be called Lugdunum, in the intro to Paris that it used to be called Lutetia, and in the intro to New York City that it used to be Nieuw-Amsterdam? A bit unnecessary, I'd say. I'd leave mention of the name Massalia to the History section. Funnyhat (talk) 19:06, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I would second this. The lead in the Paris article doesn't mention that Paris was previously called "Lutecia", I don't see why the article on Marseilles should have to. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 14:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree, after finding the first sentence almost impossible to read. The mention of the Occitan and Greek names could at least be made into a separate sentence. Coupdeforce (talk) 19:14, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Forked articles

A large number of sections that have been here for years were removed from the article on July 9th. I have restored these changes which were not discussed on the talk page and did not improve the article. I have no view on the forks, except that I don't there's a precedent for listing famous inhabitants separately (films, yes). The same editor placed a tag on the Main Sights section which I am now removing since they left no comment here. Since the list is sourced and is not an advertisement, I have removed the tag. I also removed a few peacock words, but more could be removed. Although these forked articles might be justified for capital cities, such as London, Berlin or Paris, smaller cities in France do have lists of films and famous inhabitants (Lyon, Toulouse). It took a few months of patient waiting for flickr to change the category for Eliane Plewman, so that an image of a woman from Marseille could be put on the page. The gallery took some effort to set up - it required uploading many of the pictures and maps. Probably this should be discussed at WikiProject France if there's a problem. Perhaps the word vandalism used in my edit summaries was extreme and I apologize for this (large sections were blanked), but these were major and undiscussed changes. The article is also comparable to Barcelona, possibly Nice and Montpellier. There doesn't seem to be any uniformity. Mathsci (talk) 23:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Early Greek coins

Here are some nice coins of the Greeks in Massalia between the 5th century and the 1st century BCE. PHG  19:49, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Ottoman map

Per Honor et Gloria  07:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Climate section error

This section is displaying wiki code.--IoanC (talk) 10:58, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Picture in Info Box

The Picture in the info box has very poor quality (bad cropping, overexposure of the interesting part). I tried to replace it with a better one (see below) which shows the old port and Notre Dame but my change was undone.

Two questions:
Why has a city to be represented by a bad overview picture instead of a good picture of its landmarks?
Are there any wikipedia guidlines for the pictures in info boxes or is that a decision made by the most active edit warriors? --Imehling (talk) 11:54, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

This is your file, so you're not objective. Also, this (your) picture shows Port of Marseille, not city. When created the article Port of Marseille - you can add your photo to new article. Picture in infobox need not be perfect, but in almost every case is a panorama, skyline or mosaic (some pictures in 1). Subtropical-man (talk) 15:50, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 23:41, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Marseille → Marseilles — This is both the more traditional and common way of spelling the name of this city in English. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 17:24, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

survey

• Support per WP:UE (use English). — AjaxSmack 03:35, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support per WP:Use English. 65.94.44.124 (talk) 05:37, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

• "per WP:Use English" - it would appear you have either misread, or misunderstood this guideline (like many, many editors before you). Knepflerle (talk) 22:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

• Support. Finally; should have been done long ago. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:42, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
• Very strong oppose. The assertion is completely incorrect and contradicts current common usage in English. Marseille without an "s" is the standard way to write Marseille in English. In airports in England, in English speaking newspapers, on eurostar in London, in academic papers, Marseille is always spelt as "Marseille". There is already a redirect from "Marseilles" and there seems to be no good argument to adopt a spelling which is rarely used in the English-speaking country closest to France. Here is one example from the London Times of the accident in the Vélodrome concerning Madonna's concert in 2009. The international edition of the London Times is also printed in Marseille. Similarly in the Independent, Marseille is spelt without an "s". Likewise the Guardian. Likewise the English edition of the Michelin guide to Provence. Also the New York Times uses the spelling without an "s". The Encyclopedia Britannica uses the spelling without an "s". The US government has a consulate in Marseille and on the governent website they use the spelling without an "s". Similarly the British consulate uses the spelling without an "s". Roger Davies (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) is a member of ArbCom who I believe has a long period of in-depth familiarity with Marseille (more than me), so I would rather appeal to him than wikipedians unfamiliar with matters concerning WikiProject France. Disclosure: I appear to be the editor who has made the most edits so far to this article. That is not a factor in discussing this wholly misguided suggestion. Mathsci (talk) 00:43, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Both forms are found in English; true. But to leap from there to the position that Marseille is the most common is precisely the same error as to assume that because London can be found in French (similarly, it is found in travel-guides, bibliographies and the like), that the article fr:Londres should be moved. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:32, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
    • In French Londres is the norm just as in English the word Paris is pronounced like the hero from the Trojan wars. The same applies to the capital of Scotland fr:Edimbourg which is spelt and pronounced quite differently. (In fact I believe most French people would have as much difficultly pronouncing "Edinburgh" as English-speaking people have pronouncing grenouille.) Although technically Marseille is considered the second city in France, in reality the second most important is Lyon. The English spelling of that is often Lyons which is a redirect as here. Mathsci (talk) 08:37, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
      • And the article should be at Lyons; which is, like Marseilles, the norm in English. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:59, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
        • "Lyons; which is, like Marseilles, the norm in English." - unproven, false assertion. Knepflerle (talk) 22:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
        • The comment about the Times does not appear to be quite correct. The Times Style Guide recommends the old-fashioned British spelling. Zarboublian (talk) 22:29, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support. If an official name in English differs from the local name, the official name in English on English wikipedia should state it (with a mention of the possibility to read the local name in the introduction also) Ngagnebin (talk) 04:23, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

• This is not the official English name as it is not used by either the British or the US governments. In the past, 50 years or more ago, the old spelling was probably standard usage. But that is no longer the case. Similarly in the past Bombay and Calcutta were standard British usage; but the wikipedia titles of those articles reflect current usage, namely Mumbai and Kolkata. The same applies to places in the Republic of China such as Peking which has become Beijing. The situation is slightly different in Germany and Italy (Cologne, Munich, Nuremberg, Rome, Milan, Florence, Naples, Turin). The English form of Aachen is Aix-la-Chapelle, but that is not how the article is named. Lyon/Lyons is another example: in Lyon, the British consulate does not use the "s". And the American consulate in Lyon uses the spelling without an "s". If anything is official, it is the naming conventions used by governments. So we have the spelling used by the US consulate in Marseille compared to that used by the US consulate in Munich . For that matter in English the acute accent does not appear when we write or pronounce Orléans. This applies to the literary usage as the Maid of Orleans. although there is an accent in the lede of Joan of Arc (perhaps due to Durova). The Duke of Orleans appears in Act III, Scene VII, of Shakespeare's Henry V. The Dauphin says, "My Lord of Orleans, and my lord high-Constable, you talk of horse and armour?" The English pronunciation is de rigueur there. On the other hand the Dauphin does later say in the same scene, "Le chien a retourné a son propre vomissement," with a carefully written acute accent ... Best not to discuss the usage in Henry VI, Part I: instead I will dust my bronze statuette of Jeanne d'Arc, which I believe is fireproof. :) Mathsci (talk) 08:37, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

• The British Government has not mandated an "official English spelling", although it may have decided to use the French rather than the British form of the name. Zarboublian (talk) 22:29, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
• The argument on the basis of Mumbai/Bombay, Kolkata/Calcutta and Beijing/Peking by User:Mathsci above is naïve at best, certainly misleading to anyone who doesn't think it through. The two (and other) Indian cities have changed names given them by colonial administrators/masters (whatever) which, though based on their own names, were a reminder of a time when they were subject to foreign powers. Marseilles is nothing like that. And Peking was changed to reflect a changed pronunciation or dialect shift. Again, nothing like the situation with Marseilles. Cheers, Lindsay 07:41, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. "Marseilles" is the traditional spelling in English, but "Marseille" has become more common in current references to the place. "Use English" isn't a good reason to move the page - as both versions are used, a more relevant guideline is Misplaced Pages:Naming_conventions_(use_English)#Divided_usage, and if usage is evenly divided, the article should keep its current title. Peter E. James (talk) 12:18, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
  • No, it should not; that section is, after all, part of WP:Use English, and warns against the perennial effort to leap on the Wave of the Future, to use Torino instead of English Turin, because local street-signs and handouts, and the guidebooks which copy them, use Torino. The POV that there can be no distinctively English forms (which is never applied in reverse to foreign Wikipedias writing on anglophone cities) should be a banning offense; not that this applies to every !vote here. Increase my !vote to Very strongly support. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I agree about Torino/Turin - one of the names is clearly less commonly used in English - but "Marseille" is often used in news reports (both in UK and US) unlike "Torino" which is rarely used except when referring to the Olympics or names such as Torino F.C. Peter E. James (talk) 22:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support move. "Marseilles" is the most common name for the city in English. That may be changing in Britain, which is of course a near neighbor to France, but it has not to my knowledge changed elsewhere. — Gavia immer (talk) 20:46, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

• ""Marseilles" is the most common name for the city in English" - unproven, and likely false assertion. Knepflerle (talk) 22:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. Both Marseille and Marseilles are commonly used in English, and I cannot tell for sure which is the more common in general usage. Even just ten years ago it would have been easy – with the s, no question. However, it is abundantly clear that just as top news sources, governments and organisations have dropped the s, so has general usage spelling and both forms are now fairly evenly used. It is also clear that this transition has occurred globally judging by news stories in the US, UK and Ausralia. The assertion that with-s spellings are the norm holds no water I'm afraid. As such, on balance, I see no compelling reason to move and, if anything, there is a stronger case in favour of the current title._wjemather 20:56, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
• Comment I don't see any compelling evidence about which spelling is significantly more prevalent in English. Anecdotal evidence of both usages obvious exists and indicates nothing. I did some googling and the results are not easy to interpret, largely because usage does seem to be changing. Current usage (not 1990s) at airports and the NY Times, SF Chronicle, etc. is particularly compelling. Anyway, someone needs to provide evidence that Marseilles is still the predominant spelling in English or this proposal needs to be opposed. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
• oppose - no evidence that "Marseilles" is the more common spelling in Engliash usage.·Maunus·ƛ· 22:33, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose - I'm not seeing any evidence that the spelling with the 's' is still more prevalent in English sources. I agree that the books query is biased to favor usage in the past. To the contrary, all the available evidence regarding recent usage indicates spelling without the 's' is more prevalent. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:16, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support - This is the English Misplaced Pages, not the French Misplaced Pages. GoodDay (talk) 00:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
  • There is no dispute about that. The question is which spelling is more prevalent today in English. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:38, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I've never seen it withou an 's'. GoodDay (talk) 00:39, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Yeah, I never did either, at least I didn't notice. Nothing personal, but our opinions based solely on personal experience ("I've never seen it") should not carry much weight in these discussions. We should actually look and see what the usage is in the sources, not just go by our own impression. When I did that, I found the evidence to be compelling. See section below. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:51, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
        • No probs. GoodDay (talk) 01:13, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
          • Wow, you are a rare breed... an editor whose opinion can be swayed with facts and reason. I'm impressed. --Born2cycle (talk) 01:22, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
            • Thank you / Merci. GoodDay (talk) 01:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose, Marseilles should remain an unprintworthy redirect to Marseille. Count Iblis (talk) 00:55, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support as per WP:UE and BHL's nomination and evidence below. Horologium (talk) 12:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
  • How does the evidence below support this proposal? --Born2cycle (talk) 17:21, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
    • The evidence provided by BHL (as I have already stated) supports the change, IMO. Obviously, YMMV. Horologium (talk) 21:38, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Yeah, some dictionaries are still catching up, but if you look at the evidence of actual relatively recent usage in secondary sources, the shift from s to no-s is pretty clear. --Born2cycle (talk) 22:23, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support - My dictionary says "Marseilles" is preferred, "Marseille" is secondary. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 21:28, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
  • First, dictionaries are primary sources; usage in secondary sources like newspapers is preferred. Second, you mean your 1994 dictionary, don't you? I suggest we look at more recent usage, like 2010 newspaper usage. That's what's convinced me. Surprising, but I don't see how else to interpret it. --Born2cycle (talk) 22:23, 14 December 2010 (UTC)  
    • Newspapers say "thru" also, but it's still "through". Yes, 1994. Which was in contrast to some editor who claimed that going to "Marseilles" was some kind of editorial decision against the supposedly "traditional" usage of "Marseille". That convinced me the ones supporting "Marseille" don't know what they're talking about. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 22:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
      • So one person opposed to the proposal said something that didn't make sense, and you decided that therefore no argument opposing this move has merit? --Born2cycle (talk) 22:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
        • That was just a symptom. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 22:47, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
          • "...the ones supporting "Marseille" don't know what they're talking about" – given your !vote was apparently based on your personal opinion and a 1994 dictionary rather than any research or analysis of more than one persons argument, you are just shooting yourself in the foot with that kind of off-hand remark. Bugs, I invite you (or anyone else) to show that you know what you are talking about, and provide compelling evidence that Marseilles is overwhelmingly more common in current usage, as should be required to support a move. What evidence there is above and below would certainly seem to fly in the face of any such assertion. Incidentally, two encyclopaedias even older than your dictionary (Britannica and Americana) use Marseille (no 's' – see below for details). _wjemather 22:56, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
            • It might be more interesting to research when the "s" began to be dropped. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 23:22, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
          • (ec) It's seems to me that it is a better idea to try to assess how current academics (historians, geographers, economists, etc) refer to Marseille when they write English language articles. My impression is that often writers are sloppy about this issue and both forms can be used by the same person or institution, sometimes on the same page. There is no hard and fast rule. Quality British newspapers (which do not incidentally use the Americanism "thru") provide a good indicator. BTW the usual bone of contention in this article is about how the twin-town Glasgow should be described (the flag of Scotland comes and goes, Scotland is listed with the UK). On Glasgow's website both forms of the spelling are used. It's not much better than Marseille's attempt at an English web page, some bits of which might have been translated by an automated translator. I wonder whether Baseball Bugs can read or speak French. It is almost indispensable for writing articles of this kind where much of the source material is only available in French and for that matter only locally. Mathsci (talk) 23:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
            • It would be an even better idea to drop the POV-pushing and concentrate on cleaning up the article. This is not sourced from "current academics"; the history is badly written from a piece of local boosterism from 1913. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:51, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose per Mathsci. --John (talk) 15:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose No evidence given that Marseilles is the more common form in recent English use. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:41, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support per the evidence provided by Blue-Haired Lawyer. Jonathunder (talk) 23:37, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support Per the Economist style guide: "Use English forms when they are in common use: Cologne, Leghorn, Lower Saxony, Lyons, Marseilles, Naples, Nuremberg, Turin." Colonel Warden (talk) 20:45, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

• Quite obviously "Marseille" is also in common use. Which is more common? We should not just pick one that agrees with a personal preference, rather look at the overall picture. The evidence would clearly suggest "Marseille" is more common, although "Marseilles" has been more common in the past (10+ years ago, maybe). _wjemather 21:03, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

• Marseille is not an English form; it does not appear as a headword in the OED while Marseilles does. This is not a mere personal opinion, as you misleadingly suggest, because the OED and Economist are excellent reliable sources. Colonel Warden (talk) 21:56, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
• "Marseille is not an English form;" - utter nonsense. Check practically any English lagnuage source outside the Times, OED and the Economist. Knepflerle (talk) 22:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

• What, like the BBC, the FT or CNN? I suppose anyone's using Marseille, it's either a goof or because they are transcribing a French source but that's not English. We avoid foreign language usage and neologisms; we use standard, traditional English. If it isn't in the OED, then we don't want it. Colonel Warden (talk) 23:01, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
• Colonel Warden, The Economist uses "Marseille" (123 times) more often than "Marseilles" (103 times). --Born2cycle (talk) 23:18, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

• Your search counts are not reliable. For example, the first one which I checked is a link to discussion of their style guide which is as I stated. There is reader discussion there and one of them asks, "On a bit of a sidenote, can anyone explain to me how Lyon and Marseille both gained an extra "s" in English?". You are scoring this for Marseille when it is quite the contrary. Tsk. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:48, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Bizarre. Just because the BBC (sometimes) uses Marseilles does not mean that Marseille is not also English usage. Usage is mixed. "I suppose anyone's using Marseille, it's either a goof or because they are transcribing a French source but that's not English." - this is just incorrect speculation. Sources from Britannica to the World Book encyclopedia, from the Cambridge Illustrated History of France to the New York Times all use Marseille - what language are they written in if not English? Or are the authors of all these publications "goofs"? Claiming Marseille is not also in English usage is not a "rebuttal" or a matter of opinion, it's a denial of fact. Knepflerle (talk) 23:21, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

• Your contrary examples seem to be American usage. But Marseilles is in Europe and so the applicable version of English is British English as this is an official language of the EU, per MOS:TIES. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:48, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

• "Your contrary examples seem to be American usage": sorry, but this gets ever more bizarre. The list I gave was not exhaustive, but looking at the examples I selected: the Cambridge Illustrated History isn't from Massachusetts but from a somewhat older academic institution in the UK. And Encyclopaedia Britannica, unsurprisingly given its name(!) has predominantly used British English throughout its existence (articles on colour and theatre, for example). But to make the point yet clearer: here's use of Marseille in the Guardian (British newspaper, all from this month: , , ), the BBC (, , ), and from the British academic journal Oxford Journal of French History (Oxford University Press UK, ) to British celebrity magazines (OK!: ; Hello!: , ). The form Marseille is clearly used in both US and British English, regardless of register.
• Even if Marseille were restricted to US usage - which it is clearly not - claiming British English is standard for articles relating to anywhere the EU is neither consensus nor a reality in our articles. Furthermore, the UK is not the only country of the EU with its own distinctive variety of English, lest you forget its closest neighbour. Knepflerle (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - the evidence of Mathsci and Born2cycle is wide-ranging, comprehensive and persuasive of actual common English usage - which is what WP:UE demands, contrary to the common misinterpretation that it demand "traditional" form. Evidence and thus policy point to the form without "s". Knepflerle (talk) 22:24, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose, by the following rationale:
  • The article is written in British English, which is not a priori required but makes sense because the Brits are much more likely to travel to the city than the Americans or other English speakers.
  • The title should be in English, and in the same variant of English as the article itself. The latter principle is so fundamental that we sometimes even have inconsistent titles for closely related topics, such as equaliser (mathematics) and coequalizer. (I once tried to fix this, but failed.)
  • The title should be in current English.

I can only suggest that a longer time span is more appropriate. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 13:47, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

• • In the subsection below I see compelling evidence that in Britain the spelling Marseilles has been superseded by the spelling Marseille.
  • This is consistent with my personal experience: My British colleagues generally refer to our colleagues in "Lyon", not "Lyons".

The s is silent, how can you tell. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 13:47, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Because they write it. Also, the spelling Lyons is generally associated with the old-fashioned English pronunciation that sounds like lions and in which the s is not silent at all. My colleagues use the French pronunciation (the second on this page), and in fact I do not remember hearing the lions pronunciation anywhere outside audio books. Hans Adler 17:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

• • The shift from "Marseilles" to "Marseille" is just the kind of thing you would expect to happen in a globalised society in which people sometimes travel from London to Marseille in a day, and occasionally back on the same day. There is no point in resisting such changes. As PMA observed: English does not have an Academy. This allows the language to adapt quickly to new situations.
  • Misplaced Pages's convention to use the English names for places is just an arbitrary convention. Many other English reference works use other conventions. I believe the main purpose of Misplaced Pages's convention is to use the most natural titles. In this case, "Marseille" is the most natural title, while "Marseilles" is strongly marked. A reader who looks for "Marseilles" and finds "Marseille" will just think, "Ah, of course, that's how the French spell it". On the other hand, a reader looking for "Marseille" and finding the article under "Marseilles" would be quite likely to wonder why Misplaced Pages is using such a conservative spelling. Therefore, to the extent that we have a choice because language is in flux, we should go with "Marseille". Hans Adler 18:06, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

This seems a reversion of the policy to use English. People should not be required to think "Ah, of course, that's how the French spell it", when they see an article title in Misplaced Pages. The requirement to use English should mean the opposite. We should be conservative in article naming or else we end up being cited in the Media as an example of the new spelling. By adopting the newer spelling we become more marked than by not doing so. IMHO it would be better to be the last to adopt changed spellings and to wait until there has been a dominant switch. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 13:47, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

By claiming that WP:UE should support linguistic conservatism, rather than actual usage in reliable English language source, it is clear that it is you in fact who has crucially misunderstood the policy. Its wording does not support conservatism over usage, and never has done. I fear you are reading into the policy what you would like it say, rather than what it actually does say. Knepflerle (talk) 17:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. Per Maunus and Skinsmoke. --Dэя-Бøяg 23:49, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
• My heart says "support", but my brain insists on oppose; if the s-free spelling (which looks horribly wrong to me) is truly gaining ground, which the evidence seems to show, then that should be the spelling we use. I reserve the right, however, both on WP and in real life to spell it with the s (and Lyons, too) forever. The point is, though, a bit more seriously, that for anyone, with the redirect, either could be the home, and there's no point in making such a disputed move. Cheers, Lindsay 20:29, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
  • If only all participants in these discussions could be as genuinely thoughtful as you, we'd have much fewer disputes. On behalf of all of WP, thank you. What a great example. --Born2cycle (talk) 20:34, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

evidence

I will ignore airports, since in my experience they are likely to use Firenze and München although English in general does not; therefore they are poor evidence of English usage on this issue. Similarly, as WP:NCGN observes, guidebooks tend to copy the TGV signs.

In general, and since 2000, Marseilles appears to be more common than Marseille, according to Google Books.

The New York Times (in the past year) uses Marseilles 14 times and Marseille 3. One article uses both; one of the exceptions is a travel article pretentious enough to use malfamé and bistronomie in the opening paragraphs - that's not English, any more than it was when Fowler and Mark Twain made fun of that style a century ago - and one is about the "Grand Mosque of Marseille" and is doubtless claquing its name. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:59, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Some more evidence: I looked up "Marseille" on dictionary.com] and found (omitting the entries for quilts):

• Marseilles: a seaport in and the capital of Bouches-du-Rhône department, in SE France. 914,356.
• Marseille: Ancient name: Massilia, English name: Marseilles a port in SE France, on the Gulf of Lions: second largest city in the country and a major port; founded in about 600 bc by Greeks from Phocaea; oil refining. Pop: 798 430 (1999)
• Marseilles: City in southeastern France on the Mediterranean Sea; the second-largest city in France, after Paris, and its main seaport.

The Oxford American dictionary on my Mac come up with the similar:

• Marseilles: a city and port on the Mediterranean coast of southern France; pop. 807,725. French name Marseille

And not that it counts for much but the British English spell-checker in Firefox accepts Marseilles out-of-the-box but not Marseille. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 22:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

This selective information conflicts with the official consular sites of the US and UK governments linked above. In addition it does not address the conundrum of Lyons/Lyon. Mathsci (talk) 22:12, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

There's no real conundrum. By saying that Marseille is "traditionally" spelt as Marseilles in English and that Lyon is "anglicized" as Lyons, we're quite clearly violating WP:COMMONNAME by choosing, by our own admission, spellings which are not the more normal way of spelling these cities in English. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 00:41, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

No. Tradition does not necessarily imply commonality. It may cause it, but not necessarily. Knepflerle (talk) 22:21, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

English usage is not determined by any Government; we have no Academy; the POV that we should have one is contrary to fact and deleterious to the encyclopedia. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

The google book searches both give a very similar number of results, a situation that supports my assertion above. As for the NYT, I'd suggest trying the same search with out the 's' (), the results of which would seem to make it quite clear that Marseille (no 's') is the NYT's preferred spelling. _wjemather 22:17, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

And, incidentally, an identical google book search for the period 1950–1980 suggests that no-'s' spelling, while less common than with-'s', was still widely used, including in both the 1974 Britannica and 1966 Americana. _wjemather 22:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Dictionaries on PCs, even when they are unix based, do not constitute WP:RS as far as I'm aware. Does BHL think it might occasionally be a good idea to use books as sources for editing wikipedia articles about France? They can be useful, even if they're written in French. Mathsci (talk) 22:25, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

The Google Books search isn't conclusive - "Marseilles" is more common in older books, and although it appears slightly more common in recent books, these include many reprinted versions of old books (usually with the "s"), and non-English books (without the "s", and these results appear even when specifying results only in English language). Peter E. James (talk) 23:02, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Here is what I get from the NY Times for past 365 days (tbs=qdr:y in url):

• marseille -marseilles site:nytimes.com: About 245 results
• marseilles -marseille site:nytimes.com: About 69 results

That seems to support that, at least at the NY Times, use without the 's' is over 3 times as prevalent for the past year. If we do the same thing with the SF Chronicle:

• marseilles -marseille site:sfgate.com 2 results
• marseille -marseilles site:sfgate.com About 35 results

Here again use without the 's' is much more prevalent. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:13, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

About the New York Times, I wonder if we can remove references to the football club which, presumably, will always be referred to as Marseille. My impression is that the Times uses both (leaves it up to the writer) but hard numbers would be useful. --RegentsPark (talk) 03:14, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

The article has been written in British English from a long time back, so I would suggest looking at British newspaper usage. I have already mentioned the Times, Independent, and Guardian, three of the four serious British daily newspapers. The fourth is the Daily Telegraph. They do not use an "s" any more in reporting events which have nothing to do with the local football team Olympique Marseille. Mathsci (talk) 14:05, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

This is simply incorrect. The Guardian, December 9, 2010: , 27 October 2010: . The Independent, 15 October 2006: . You also omitted Financial Times (definitely a serious British newspaper): December 6, 2010 and the BBC: 4 September 2010 . Horologium (talk) 00:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I gave examples above from the Times , the Independent and the Guardian . Would you like me to produce more? Here is an extremely long set of very recent examples from the BBC. The search with an "s" has much fewer entries for each year (22 examples without an "s" in 2010, 8 examples with an "s") and almost never in a headline. A similar check could be carried out on newspapers. But clearly usage is often inconsistent. I would prefer if you could address the issue of academic book titles which are more relevant (as sources) and which usually have a lot of thought put into them. Historians or other academics specializing in the South of France generally have more time to reflect on what they're writing than journalists with a deadline. Mathsci (talk) 00:52, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

The Guardian has a travel page for Marseille without an "s" . There doesn't seem to be a page with an "s". The icons use "Marseille", for example on this weather page. The Times online seems to use spelling with an "s" more frequently, but there are a lot of articles by sports writers because of OM. Mathsci (talk) 01:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

The financial times used "Marseille" several times in an arts article on Friday. They spell La Vieille Charité not quite correctly, because of the hyphen. (BTW I wrote that article.) Mathsci (talk) 01:29, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

At m-w.com Marseilles (with an s) is defined as "a firm cotton fabric" and there is also a reference to Marseille (no s), the city and port. --Born2cycle (talk) 17:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Again I looked up how Cambridge University Press would handle the spelling of Marseille. Without an "s". Here is the latest publication on the Abbey of St Victor with the CUP blurb. .Also "Structure and Mobility: The Men and Women of Marseille, 1820-1870" by William Hamilton Sewell, Jr, is published by CUP. I looked for other major academic presses. University of Illinois Press published "The Holocaust and Jews of Marseille: The Enforcement of Anti-Semitic Policies in Vichy France" by Donna F. Ryan. Harvard University Press published "Sisters of Liberty: Marseille, Lyon, Paris and the Reaction to a Centralized State, 1868-1871" in 1971 by Louis Greenberg. Yale University Press published "Communism and Collaboration: Simon Sabiani and Politics in Marseille, 1919–1944" in 1989 by Paul Jankowski. Oxford University Press will publish "Marseille in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages" by Simon Loseby. In 1975 OUP published " The Lower Rhone and Marseille (Problem Regions of Europe) by Ian B. Thompson. Here's another book from Yale UP, "Crown, Church and Episcopate Under Louis XIV", by Joseph Bergin in which the spelling Marseille is used consistently. That would seem to imply that academics prefer the spelling without an "s". I've only checked books, but I think it could be the case that academics specializing in French or European history have a preference for the French spelling. On google scholar the number of articles with "Marseille" in the title was about 10 times greater than the number of articles with "Marseilles" in the title. It could well be that from that google scholar sample a large proportion of the academics using the spelling "Marseilles" are in fact French attempting to write English correctly. Mathsci (talk) 22:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I suggest the spelling without the s is so prevalent in English usage that it's misleading to refer to it as "the French spelling", which implies it's not the English spelling. It is the English spelling. The s variant is exactly that, a spelling variant that may have been most prevalent as recently as the 1990s, but appears to be falling more and more out of favor. --Born2cycle (talk) 23:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I think that top academic publishers in the US and the UK don't use an "s" shows that that is probably correct. Those supporting this move have not addressed the issue from the perspective of academic writing without which wikipedia could not exist. None of their arguments presented so far comes close to explaining the spelling of Marseille in academic books published by top quality publishers like Harvard University Press and Yale University Press. Mathsci (talk) 23:44, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I also note that in January 2008, User:Atitarev, who identifies as a linguist on his user page and in fact appears to edit mostly linguistics-related articles, marked Lyons and Marseilles in English exonyms as historical. This does not appear to have been controversial. Hans Adler 17:40, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I found an interesting blog post on "Loss of anglicizations" here: . Click on "About" for the author's qualifications. (His name is Graham Pointon.) Hans Adler 18:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Good finds, Hans. It should be abundantly clear to everyone now that while Marseilles (with s) was once predominant in English usage, it has clearly fallen out of favor. Whether the shift occurred 20, 15, 10, or 2 years ago is not entirely clear, but I don't see how that's relevant to the fact that we're clearly over the hump now. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:28, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

History

I am glad to see that the archaeology comes from a current article; I will check whether it verifies the text later. But what follows is pathetic:

Marseille, the oldest city in France, was founded in 600 BC by Greeks from Phocaea (as mentioned by Thucydides Bk1,13) as a trading port under the name Μασσαλία (Massalia; see also List of traditional Greek place names). The precise circumstances and date of founding remain obscure, but nevertheless a legend survives. Protis, while exploring for a new trading outpost or emporion for Phocaea, discovered the Mediterranean cove of the Lacydon, fed by a freshwater stream and protected by two rocky promontories. Protis was invited inland to a banquet held by the chief of the local Ligurian tribe for suitors seeking the hand of his daughter Gyptis in marriage. At the end of the banquet, Gyptis presented the ceremonial cup of wine to Protis, indicating her unequivocal choice. Following their marriage, they moved to the hill just to the north of the Lacydon; and from this settlement grew Massalia

• Thucydides says nothing of the sort. The passage in question is a single sentence, which does say that there were Phocaeans at Massilia and that they beat the Carthaginians at sea; but it says nothing about founding, and has no date.
• Protis and Gyptis are from Justin, perhaps the least reliable of the ancient sources. The year is wrong (if only slightly) and - much more important - no secondary source (not even such romantic authors as Sabine Baring Gould) believes this romance.

Massalia was one of the first Greek ports in Western Europe, growing to a population of over 1000. It was the first settlement given city status in France. Facing an opposing alliance of the Etruscans, Carthage and the Celts, the Greek colony allied itself with the expanding Roman Republic for protection. This protectionist association brought aid in the event of future attacks, and perhaps equally important, it also brought the people of Massalia into the complex Roman market. The city thrived by acting as a link between inland Gaul, hungry for Roman goods and wine (which Massalia was steadily exporting by 500 BC), and Rome's insatiable need for new products and slaves.

That this is not English is a fixable problem. That it is nonsense, unsupported by sources, is much more serious; the source cited in discusses Massalia "shortly before the founding of Narbo" - i.e. about 125 BC. Rome did not export goods or wine in 500 BC - and was then allied with Carthage; by the time Rome did ally with Massilia the Etruscans had ceased to be a political factor (and if we are to believe Justin at all, the Massaliots were growing their own wine).

"One of the first Greek ports in Western Europe"? Are Sicily and Magna Graecia no longer in Western Europe then?

And "given city status" is gibberish. Who is supposed to have given it? Massalia was a polis from its foundation. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:17, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Pmanderson tagging sourced edits in the history without checking

Although I helped sourced the first paragraph and other bits of the history, the part Pmanderson has objected to predates my involvement with this article. Pmanderson has suggested that Thucydides does not mention Massalia, because he claims that has checked the source and could not find any reference. But he cannot have checked the source, because the source does indeed mention Massalia. Here for example is an extract from Thomas Arnold's edition of book one of the Peloponnesian Wars. Contrucci & Duchene translate the sentence from Thucydide (no "s"): « Les Phocéens, écrit-il, au moment de la colonistation de Marseille, défirent les Carthaginois dans un bataille naval.» Does Pmanderson have access to a history of Marseille? Mathsci (talk) 02:08, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes; more to the point, I have access to a copy of Thucydides. What I said was that Thucydides does not mention any date; he doesn't (although as I also said, he does mention the presence of Phocaeans in Massalia, but there are fuller sources for that: Herodotus or Diodorus). If the association with Cambyses and Polycrates were intended as temporal (dubious; the next sentence is about Troy), that would be around 525 BC, not 600; much more compatible with the accepted date of the settlement of Massalia, around 542 BC.

English does not use the French spelling of Thucydides, any more than it uses Énée. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Pm, could you avoid adding tags, please? These should be added only as a last resort. It would make sense to help look for additional refs instead. SlimVirgin 03:40, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

What good will additional references do? The existing text is unsupported. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:46, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Then please look for sources that support it. I've looked for some for the founding year on Google Books, and found plenty. All you have to do is choose the best one, and add it to a footnote, then do the same for the other points you believe are unsourced. It's only after doing that, if you can't find a source, and you report back here and nobody responds or will let you fix it, that you should consider tagging. SlimVirgin 04:55, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

But existing sources don't support it because it's wrong. Thucydides does not give a date for the founding of Marseilles; and the date 600 (or rather 599) BC, is from that extremely dubious source Justin. Rome did not export wine, or anything else, in 500 BC; the source cited is talking about 150. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:59, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Rather than engaging in personal exegesis of Thucydides, a primary source, I think you should present your secondary sources, that of course specifically treat the topic of the foundation of Marseilles and enlighten us by using those instead.·Maunus·ƛ· 05:08, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm not expounding Thucydides; I'm quoting him. And the Phocaeans, when they were colonising Massalia, defeated the Carthaginians on7 the sea. That's Jowett's translation, as you can see for yourself; that's all Thucydides says. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I'm responding to PMAnderson's post at WP:CGR. PMAnderson's arguments are usually well-founded in primary sources, so I think it's not a good idea to brush him off like this. Thucydides gives no date for the foundation of Marseilles. Thucydides' statement that Φωκαῆς τε Μασσαλίαν οἰκίζοντες Καρχηδονίους ἐνίκων ναυμαχοῦντες ("the Phocaeans, while they were founding Marseilles, defeated the Carthaginians in a sea-fight") suggests that Thucydides is saying that Marseilles was founded during the reign of Polycrates of Samos, i.e., circa 525 BC. My OCD says that Marseille was founded ca. 600; whatever reason it has for this, it's not the passage of Thucydides just cited. Apparently it's Justin, which I have no access to right now (nor is it cited in the article). If there's going to be a citation of a secondary source in the article, it should be to a specialist in ancient history, not Sabine Baring-Gould. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:40, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the last; but I doubt Protis and Gyptis is told better in more reliable sources, and I do not have access to CAH or a history of Greek colonization at the moment. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:44, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

"There are two different traditions about the foundation of Massalia, and consequently two different dates for the foundation. One tradition places the foundation in 600 (Timaios (FGrHist 566) fr. 7 = 120 years before the battle of Salamis), while the other places it at the time of the fall of Phokaia (no. 859) to the Persians in 546 (Antiochos (FGrHist 555) fr. 8; Isoc. Archidamus 84). The archaeological evidence supports the earlier date (Graham (2001) 38), but the existence of two different foundation dates may perhaps suggest a kind of refoundation in C6m, as a consequence of the arrival of refugees from Phokaia after the Persian conquest of Ionia (Gras (1987); Domínguez (1991b) 250–53; Bats (1994); Gras (1995)). All the sources agree on the metropolis: Phokaia (Hecat.fr. 55;Thuc. 1.13–14; Arist.fr. 560), though there is no unanimity concerning the oecist(s): it was Euxenos (Arist.fr. 560), or Simos and Protis (Just. Epit. 43.3.8–11),or Protis (Plut. Sol. 2.7) the son of Euxenos (Arist.); or Kreontiades (Antiochos (FGrHist 555) fr. 8); finally, Strabo 4.1.4 stresses the role of the Ephesian woman Aristarche as "hegemon tou plou", whatever that means (Malkin (1990) 51–52). Similarly,there are different foundation myths for the city in Classical sources: marriage of the Greek oecist to the daughter ofthe native king (Arist.fr. 560 and Just. Epit. 43.3.4–12, with some variations); a completely different tradition, including the flight from Phokaia during the Persian conquest, is found in Antiochos (FGrHist 555) fr. 8 and Timaios (FGrHist 566) fr. 72.Strabo 4.1.4 gives details which may correspond to any of these traditions." (Adolf J. Dominguez, Massalia, pp. 165-166 in AN INVENTORY OF ARCHAIC AND CLASSICAL POLEIS, OUP 2004)87.202.156.68 (talk) 10:40, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Much obliged, and very useful. Note that Timaeus (and consider Polybius' opinion of him), is credited with the early date, but does not tell the story of Protis and Gyptis. But I will have to consult a secondary source which decides what to make of these data; the reader would hardly thank us for a lump of this information. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:39, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

This is a direct reversion. It is undiscussed and unwarranted, and removes sourced and well-defined information. At this point, what choice have I but to tag? If this revert war continues, I will take this to AN3. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:06, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

If (island)

"If (island)" redirects to here and it's nearly impossible to find where it's mentioned on this page, and there seems to be very little information about the island on this page. Part of the problem is just being able to find the name "If" in an article that is not dedicated to the island. It seems like it deserves its own page with all of its information and history in one place, or at least a dedicated section on this page. It seems a lot more practical to remove the redirect and let it have its own page, as a separate section on this page would be too distracting. However, I have no idea how tightly coupled it is with the area of Marseille. I can only liken the situation to that of Alcatraz Island, which has its own page and is not merely redirected to San Francisco. Ratonneau also has its own page.

Coupdeforce (talk) 19:02, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I have changed the redirect to Château d'If, as in French wikipedia. — M-le-mot-dit (T) 06:46, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Films about Marseille

I have just looked at the list of films about Marseille - some of the links to Marseille are fairly tenuous.

• Taxi 2? Taxi was about a cab driver in Marseille but Taxi 2 is simply the same story transposed to Paris with a completely new set of actors.
• Taxi 3 and 4? OK, some of the original actor reappear, but the fims are all set in different cities.
• The Bourne Identity? I believe Bourne landed in Marseille in the book but (possibly) not the film (if he did, it was very, very brief).
• Love Actually? There was one (unattributed) scene filmed in Marseille Provence airport.

I could provide a list of films that have much stronger links to Marseille, but this would mean deleting much of the original list. I thought I would flag the problem here before doing anything. Any opinions?

Say-Mars-Say-Yeah (talk) 15:12, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Flag icons - international relations & twinning arrangements

Below is a slightly modified version of a message posted on Talk:Aix-en-Provence

Since there are flag icons for major American cities, such as Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia and Los Angeles, as well as the twin town of Glasgow, I have restored the flag icons in this article. Neither wikipedia policy nor current consensus on WikiProject Cities supports the unilateral edits made by John. It has been common practice for a long period (8 years or more) to accompany bare lists of sister cities/international relations with flag icons if desired. This is in accordance with WP:MOSICON. John has written elsewhere that the use of flag icons is to the detriment of the project. Unsurprisingly very few people have so far agreed with him. It is hardly a burning issue and I am surprised that John appears to be making it so. As far as discussions go, instead of discussing the use of flag icons in all city articles, John started a discussion on WikiProject Cities solely concerning US cities. That was a direct result of discussions with me on User talk:John, where I mentioned the cities above (amongst others). Misplaced Pages does not differentiate between cities in the USA and cities in the rest of the world. I started a discussion concerning this issue for all cities on WikiProject Cities. John has made multiple edits to articles on cities in France and Germany (28 articles), removing flag icons. He has not done so on any articles about American cities. Mathsci (talk) 08:35, 8 September 2012 (UTC) (slightly refactored)

John removed the above comments, claiming that it in his view it was a personal attack. Please could he stop doing so and read WP:INVOLVED. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 09:05, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Sourcing

I added the ref improve tag because the article is poorly sourced. The "geography", "climate", and "education and research" sections all are completely unsourced. The "economy" section has three sources, and four unsourced statements that are tagged with "citation needed". In the "sport" section only the second paragraph has a source, and the first and third paragraph are unsourced. In the "transport" section, the first six paragraphs are unsourced. Rather than tagging each of these sections individually, I thought it's better to tag the whole article. I can tag individual sections if other editors prefer that, but it definitely is not an error to tag the article as needing additional references. Zeromus1 (talk) 08:02, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Please tag the statements you feel are in doubt, not the whole article. Also please to check any statements you feel are in doubt yourself. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 08:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

• The twin towns section needs proper sourcing; if proper third-party sources cannot be found, it probably should be removed. --John (talk) 10:21, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Your understanding of sourcing in this instance seems quite incorrect and, as I have written elsewhere, I am surprised you made this claim. Almost all information on twinning arrangements comes from local government sources, which are completely reliable for information of this kind. That is the case for Philadelphia, where a local government source is used. If you want continue this discussion, please do so on in the new subsection of WikiProject Cities about sourcing. Other editors can tell you about what happens in other articles about sourcing information of this kind in a more general context. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 15:08, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
    • If proper third-party sources cannot be found, it probably should be removed. Other editors can tell you about what happens in other articles about sourcing information of this kind in a more general context. Thanks, --John (talk) 16:27, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
      • I understand that you're involved in WikiopProject Scotland. Why not go and remove the twinning information from Edinburgh and Glasgow on twinning, sourced to the websites of their local city councils, if you believe you're correct. I believe you are profoundly mistaken. Others have said exactly the same on this exact same point at WikiProject Cities. Government sources are WP:RS for government information. The same is true for local government. Mathsci (talk) 21:10, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
        • Maybe if you just keep repeating that over and over again, it will magically become true. --John (talk) 21:25, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Nobody so far has agreed with your statements about local government sources at WikiProject Cities. Please listen to what experienced users are telling you there. If you want yet another opinion, ask at WP:RSN. That is how wikipedia works. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 22:03, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

At WP:ANI Dennis Brown wrote: "I will say this, city twinning should not require secondary sources if only primary exist, so thinking that twinning info should be removed is a complete misunderstanding of WP:RS and WP:V. Primary sources are fine as it isn't contentious or likely to be fudged." That clearly applies here and almost everywhere else. Please drop this issue. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 22:14, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I won't drop it, but I do think it is probably better to just have it in one place. I look forward to reading your reasoned arguments there. --John (talk) 16:23, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

No need to reply twice. Please keep the discussion at WikiProject Cities. You could also have a word with Dennis Brown if what he wrote hasn't quite clicked in your mind. He's very patient. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 18:59, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

LGBT 2013

This is an encyclopedia entry on Marseille, not a news blog. The fact that Marseille will be the 2013 European city of culture is already mentioned in the article. There is no need to mention it in the lede per WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. The Gay Pride event, if sourced, could be mentioned somewhere in the main body of the article, but again not in the lede per WP:NOTNEWSPAPER and because it is completely undue. A brief mention somewhere in the culture section is probably fine, if other editors agree, but please only do so with sources. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 20:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Immigration

An IP from Leicester has twice added a statement about Marselle possibly becoming the first predominantly Muslim city in France. One source is a BBC world service blurb for a radio programme. That is not an WP:RS. The second source is a National Geographic opinion piece about politics in Marseille which ends with an interview with a young Muslim lady. The journalist ends the piece by mentioning that some demographers have predicted that at some time in the future Marseille might be the first predominantly Muslim city in Western Europe. That mention en passant is not sufficient to include a definitive statement in the text. No official figures are released by the French government, but it could well be possible to find a proper WP:RS discussing this issue. More than likely it would be in French. Until such a source can be found, that kind of content cannot be included. Mathsci (talk) 00:36, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I've read WP:RS and both sources qualify. If you think they don't please explain why. HPotato (talk) 01:14, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

A blurb for a radio programme is not an adequate source. Nor is the cursory piece in the National Geographic, consisting of interviews. It makes a speculative statement, which does not make any reference to a scholarly text. There are long books in French on immigration in Marseille. One for example is, "Histoires d'immigrations a Marseille", editions Jeanne Laffitte, 2007, ISBN 978-2-86-276-450-4. Unfortunately it does not cover recent history or make demographic predictions. To find more recent sources in French I would search for "immigration musulmane Marseille" on google books or google scholar. Cherry-picking isolated sentences from sources which do not directly discuss this particular issue is not helpful. You need to find sources which discuss the matter in some kind of detail or depth. The articles I've seen talk about the paradox of Marseille, with its large North African population, much of it unofficial and undeclared, yet apparently placated by the city's policies. They talk about the project for a new large mosque, proposed in 2001 but later delayed by the mayor Gaudin. But otherwise it's hard to find anything substantial. So please find a more recent book or journal article discussing this demographic issue before including any kind of statement in the "voice of wikipedia". The lack of government figures is a further problem. Perhaps the French wikipedia articles on Marseille and related topics discuss this issue and could provide the missing sources. Mathsci (talk) 01:44, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Describing the BBC source as a 'blurb' seems to be an attempt to discredit it. Are you suggesting that programme descriptions fall short of normal BBC standards? Is this official wikipedia policy? If not, please stop reverting the edit. HPotato (talk) 01:56, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

It's a programme guide on a web page. There are pages on the BBC website which give in-depth coverage of issues, written by experts, but programme guides are not numbered amongst them. Cherry-picking means taking a sentence out of context as you have done. Prediction and speculation are different things. The sentence you included amounts to POV-pushing and goes against wikipedia central policy of neutral point of view. Mathsci (talk)

(edit conflict) I reverted the edit per WP:CRYSTAL. Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball. Events in the future should not be included unless predicted by reliable academic sources. The sources you provide contain mere speculation with no definite dates or other concrete data. Misplaced Pages articles are no places for speculative extrapolations. Δρ.Κ.  02:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Are you also suggesting that programme descriptions fall short of normal BBC standards? Is this official wikipedia policy? If so, please provide a link. HPotato (talk) 02:39, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Why not ask about the status of Radio Times or web pages advertising programmes on WP:RSN if you are in any doubt? Mathsci (talk) 02:49, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I have already provided you with the policy. The link is WP:CRYSTAL. But to help you along I quote from the policy:

Articles that present original research in the form of extrapolation, speculation, and "future history" are inappropriate. While scientific and cultural norms continually evolve, we must wait for this evolution to happen, rather than try to predict it.

and

Speculation and rumor, even from reliable sources, are not appropriate encyclopedic content.

Δρ.Κ.  03:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Firstly: neither editor has provided any justification for their claim that either the BBC page or the National Geographic article is not a reliable source. Secondly: the fact has not been taken out of context from either article - both address the issue of the Muslim population of Marseille. Thirdly: demographic forecasts are neither speculation nor prediction (in the sense that Δρ.Κ. intends), they are straightforward descriptions of the constituent parts of a population in the future based on its constituent parts in the present. Barring large-scale unforseen calamities such as wars or mass migrations, demographic predictions always come true. Finally: this is not original research in the sense in which the phrase is used on wikipedia. Are there any further objections? HPotato (talk) 13:26, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

These sources are not demographers and are not experts. Please supply the opinions of real experts not anecdotal evidence. This is also verging on speculation because it is too open-ended. When is Marseilles scheduled to become predominantly Muslim? In a week? In a month? In fifty years? You cannot have an open-ended statement like that in the article. Please supply a real demographic study with definite projections not idle chatter. And please read WP:CONSENSUS. There is no consensus for this edit. Δρ.Κ.  17:30, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

The source is reliable, therefore the report is not merely anecdotal. Jonathan Laurence (Associate Professor of Political Science at Boston College), for instance, expects Marseille to become a majority Muslim city around 2030: http://bcm.bc.edu/issues/summer_2010/features/in-the-year-2030.html HPotato (talk) 20:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

If you are referring to this passage:

In 2030, to be sure, Islam will continue to be the fastest-growing religion in many parts of the continent (with evangelical Protestantism keeping pace in some places), and many disused churches will have become mosques. A small number of cities will be on the verge of a Muslim majority—Amsterdam, Bradford (England), Malmö, Marseille

I'm sorry but no. It doesn't say that Marseille will become Muslim by 2030. It says it will be on the verge of becoming Muslim. That's hugely different. So in eighteen years from now it is not even certain that Marseille will have a Muslim majority. This projection is so long term and vague, that it is not fit to be included in the article. Finally the author of this article presents no numerical calculations or projections to support the vague and long term conclusions which are being made, in effect engaging in speculation. Δρ.Κ.  07:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

The facts and figures are all there, and anyone who reads the article and understands the science will see that what I've written above is readily deducible from the article. (Personal attack removed)

If you continue to dispute the idea that demographics is a science, you should do so on the demography talk page, not here. Otherwise the objection of WP:BALL is no more relevant to this case than it would be to any other case involving scientific facts.

And you should read WP:CONSENSUS yourself: it doesn't mean a vote or a majority, the article states that 'Ideally, it arrives with an absence of objections'. I've dealt with all of the objections that you and Mathsci have raised, and if you or others present further reasonable objections I'm happy to deal with them and rephrase my edit if necessary :).

But if you want my advice, I think you're wasting your time (and mine too, with all due respect) trying to refute the points I've made. If you really object to the proposition that Marseille will almost certainly become a Muslim majority city in the near future, then your time and energy would be better spent finding a reliable source which says so. HPotato (talk) 08:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages does not report on speculation which is not properly sourced per WP:CRYSTAL. It is true that the cherry-picked sentence you wanted to add from the BBC WS on-line programme guide can be found on lots of websites. I found a long discussion on Stormfront for example. On wikipedia, however, the onus is on you to find an WP:RS on demography making these predictions in detail about Marseille. That's how wikipedia works. It's not a mirror site for Stormfront. Mathsci (talk) 08:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I've provided a third source - perhaps you overlooked it in your eagerness to regale us with your humour :) HPotato (talk) 09:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

There was no joke in my last message. Dr.K. has already explained why it is not useful as a WP:RS per WP:CRYSTAL. There is no need for me to repeat what he wrote. Misplaced Pages is for established encyclopedic content: it is not some kind of speculative Op-Ed. If there is a glaring omission in the current article, it is a reference to the new museum that has just been built near the Fort St Jean, the "Museum of the Mediterranean". The museum has been constructed, with underwater windows, and the exhibits are gradually being added for Marseille 2013. Mathsci (talk) 09:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Also, HPotato, if the only purpose of your account is, hot off a block, to edit-war this contentious speculative content into the article against consensus and wikipedia policy, then you are likely to be reported at WP:ANI and possibly topic banned or blocked. Please find a reliable demographic source, not a speculative article on what might be the case in 2030. Mathsci (talk) 09:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Your objection lacks any real substance, so I'm taking this to dispute resolution :). HPotato (talk) 11:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

No, the content you wish to add violates WP:CRYSTAL. You must be patient and wait to find out from Dr.K. what he thinks. Last time your tendentious editing and revert warring led to a 31 hour block. If your account was created with the sole purpose of painting Marseille as a problematic city plagued by an ever-increasing Muslim presence (that seems to be your non-neutral point of view) then your editing will be regarded as tendentious. It so far falls into the category of POV-pushing. Please read WP:BOOMERANG. Otherwise find an adequate WP:RS about demographic trends in Marseille. Mathsci (talk) 12:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Mathsci's analysis. I am not going to repeat my arguments above but an 18-year uncertain projection is too far in the future and too vague to be included in any article. Adding to that the lack of adequate theoretical analysis and your proposal of inclusion of this information becomes untenable. Of course you are free to go to the dispute resolution noticeboard if you want to pursue this further. Δρ.Κ.  12:52, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Good :). Lets hope we end up with an accurate and balanced article then :). HPotato (talk) 13:16, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

The DRN got filed, but needs to get re-filed for the bot's sake. ~~Ebe123~~ → report 14:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

1. Marseille Espérance. Tous différents, tous Marseillais

• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists
• All unassessed articles
• C-Class WikiProject Cities articles
• All WikiProject Cities pages
• C-Class France articles
• Top-importance France articles
• All WikiProject France pages
• C-Class Classical Greece and Rome articles
• Mid-importance Classical Greece and Rome articles
• All WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome pages