Talk:Louis-Eugène Cavaignac
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | This level-5 vital article is ratedB-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale.It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia'sMain Page in theOn this day section onOctober 15, 2021 andOctober 15, 2025. |
A very nice article, but the introduction could use some work, I think. Firstly, as it stands, it emphasizes that he was born at Paris (which should probably readin Paris), and mentions his lineage and relations, not his significance. The very bottom of the article seems to indicate he was head of state just before Napoleon. Isn't this significant? Shouldn't his position in the Council of Ministers, or his role in Napoleon's rise to power, be mentioned over his identity as "a general, son of so-and-so, brother of so-and-so"?LordAmeth09:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level.BetacommandBot07:17, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is it true that he was the first General to be photographed with a moustache, but no beard (in the Prince Albert style), thus establishing this less-usual fashion, which became the standard way of separating military from naval officers?(86.140.6.209 (talk)23:36, 9 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]
The main copyrighted website (https://www.ohio.edu/chastain/ac/cavaig.htm) took its content from an academic work (The French Republic under Cavaignac) that is already being directly used here as reference. I have replaced the citations between these two, as the information previously taken from the copyrighted source is the same as in (and was in turn sourced from) said work. Another infringing citation to a different URL of the same website (https://www.ohio.edu/chastain/dh/frpres.htm), which hasn't been tagged as copyvio and was cited only once, is now redirected to a work from a different author, containing the same information, and no longer infringing copyright.Excommunicato (talk)17:30, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from:https://www.ohio.edu/chastain/ac/cavaig.htm. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored,unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see"using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or"donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
Forlegal reasons, we cannot acceptcopyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source ofinformation, and, if allowed underfair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks andreferenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the originalorplagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see ourguideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violationsvery seriously, and persistent violatorswill beblocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. —Diannaa (talk)12:59, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
