Talk:Champmol

Notes on the Notes

I saw Aimé Piron in FR WP I think, but the article only mentions literary activity. The source says it is a "print after a drawing" but I agree this looks more like a drawing. The Lindquist article (16 pp) & book (308 pp) are different - the article may well be recycled there but the pages refs would not work. Johnbod (talk) 22:25, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

The Piron drawing is also fig. 1, p. 16 of the Sherry C. M. Lindquist article that is the Wikipedia article's first citation. That's my basis for adjusting the caption. I figured the Dijon library accession number would be superfluous. --Wetman (talk) 12:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thanks! He was dad to Alexis Piron, as you probably know. Johnbod (talk) 13:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Article name

I have moved the article from "Champmol" to "Chartreuse de Champmol" because "Chartreuse de Champmol" is the common name of the subject.olivier (talk) 16:13, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

No it isn't, in English anyway! You should not have moved it without discussion, as you ought to know, and I will now have to go through the proper procedure to get it moved back. What a bore. Johnbod (talk) 17:43, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

The proper procedure does not require a discussion in all cases. Don't try to put a manipulative blame on me with such insinuations. Here is the explanation I gave you on my talk page:

Not all moves are controversial. This one seems obvious to me. Why should the article be at "Champmol" while the bolded title within the article (which, by the way was misspelled) is "Chartreuse de Champmol". You can refer to Help:Moving a page. Bullet point #2 states in reasons for moving: "The title does not follow Wikipedia's naming conventions, such as that it is not the common name of the subject or it is overprecise". "Chartreuse de Champmol" IS the common name of the subject. It seems that a title name other than this should be discussed.olivier (talk) 16:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

The title of "Champmol" that you gave to the article when you created it is not appropriate. Anyway, I moved it back and leave it to other editors to discuss. olivier (talk) 18:39, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Johnbod, do you insist to keep "Champmol" as title? Honestly, you must agree that there should be more appropriate titles for the article. olivier (talk) 18:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Quite a quarrel! The French Wikipedia says "Chartreuse de Champmol". That should be a decisive reason to give the article here the same titel. Although being a Dutchmen, i'm not talking double Dutch, I hope. Vriescan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vriescan (talk • contribs) 11:16, 22 February 2011 (UTC)