Jump to content

Talk:Cyrano de Bergerac/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Cause of Death

What was Bergerac's cause of death? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 17:58, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)

It seems that a piece of plank dropped on his head.
That is Rostand's version. In fact he died of a disease (some historians believe syphilis). He wrote about his symptoms but never name it (for obvious reasons)--Iv 16:01, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Cousin

I thought Roxane was said to be his Cousin in the play. In the Jose Ferrar film the captain definitely refers to her as "my cousin" as does, I think, Cyrano, when talking to Christian. Lordjim13 11:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Plagiarism by Moliere

It is not a supposition, it is a fact that Molière has taken the galley scene from the "Pédant joué" of Cyrano. Considering it is one of the most famous of Molière's scenes, one can consider him a talented author. Also being one of the first science-fiction author doesn't count for nothing IMHO. --Iv 16:01, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

How to Spell Roxane

What was Roxane's original spelling? Why is a modified spelling given in the article?

Roxane was the original spelling in the play. Roxanne or any other variant is technically incorrect. See http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext98/cdben10.txt RasputinAXP 17:52, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Ishbel Addyman claims

why is it that only Ishbel Addyman's claims which are in variance with other biographers given prominence? seems like a book promotion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.231.81.86 (talk) 10:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

In fact, this is just an artefact of the majority of scholarship being in French. Jacques Prévot, after completing an edition of the complete works in 1976, concluded that Cyrano was homosexual. I have added most of the references from the French version of this article and once I’ve added some translated text, I’ll add a section on the issue with citations. I don’t think it’s a controversial claim anymore. ☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 09:19, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Play vs. History

This article mainly looks Rostand's view on Cyrano! The play is so famous (having made the author rich at once) that all the clichés of the ingenous play surpass by far the truth (or what research has found up to now). The historical Cyrano was indeed a versatile personality. Especially in writing letters he is very talented (Cyrano de Bergerac, Lettres satiriques et amoureuses, Desjonquères/Dix-septième siècle, 1999).

An excellent account of the historical Cyrano by Jacques Prevot can be found in "Libertins du 

a sruble

Audio versions on the web

Around the web where are there any free audio versions in French, in English or both of Cyrano de Bergerac by Rostand?

Cyrano Syndrome?

I've seen a new term being coined in conjunction with Internet Dating entitled, "Cyrano Syndrome." The use seems to be in the context of people falling in love with through the email relationship and IM chat that ensues without really spending time with them physically in the same place or even on the phone. There seems to be a connotation that the "syndrome" often leads people to become very dissatisfied and very disillusioned when they finally meet up in real life. I don't know who coined the phrase, and there doesn't seem to be any online definitions to this phrase, but it would seem (based on the description of the play) to be based loosely on the play of Bergerac's life. The idea of a woman falling in love with an articulate writer/communicator who is not who she believes him to be. Any additions, thoughts, roots and instances of this phrase would be appreciated.

Uh...yeah. Just about every damn phone-sex and Internet relationship there is. Read my first book; I talk about ones I've has at length there. --The_Iconoclast (talk) 01:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Was Cyrano a Jew?

It is unknown. As anti-Semitism was very common in the fifteenth century, perhaps he took pains to hide this fact?

Thank You Donald

Do'nt forget to look at Donald's Gift ...and be polite. (Lunarian 11:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC))

Removal of the character study

I tidied this up a little to remove some of the play elements. Instead of transfering the Roxane character study (a 5-paragraph expository essay) to the play article, however, I deleted it completely, as I thought it was too long and specific for the purposes of an article about the play. It WAS a decent essay, however. Maybe if someone wants to create a seperate article about Roxane, they could get the character study out of the page history and use it as the bulk of the article. DamionOWA 07:22, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I removed it also in a previous edit - good idea for the writer to start a new article on Roxane. Adambrowne666 07:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Moving so-called "plagiarism alert" to talk page

"*Plagiarism alert!* The following line quotes directly from http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/bergerac.htm !!! The real Cyrano de Bergerac had, in real life, very little in common with the hero of the Rostand play." A5 20:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Cyrano's homosexuality

People keep removing the reference to C's homosexuality - maybe they think it's a piece of vandalism? - I've provided a citation linking to Don Webb's translation of L'Autre Monde, where he clearly explicates the gay nature of Cyrano's original works. Adambrowne666 06:04, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm probably not qualified to comment on how authoritative Don Webb is on this subject. But I'm looking at the particular page you've linked to ("The Other World: Some Questions and Answers, by Don Webb and Thomas R."), and I'm coming up empty for references to homosexuality. That little question-and-answer session does get into freethinking and radicalism, sure, but that's obviously not the same thing. Should the link go to some other page on that site? Iralith 19:33, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I can't find it either now - I remember the reference is a subtle aside - Don seems to not want to make a big deal out of it - but it is on that site somewhere. I might have linked to the wrong page. I'll find it when I have time. I remember though, when I read that observation and subsequently looked back over Other Worlds, I realised he was absolutely right - it's clearly a gay book; maybe it's because of the Rostand's emphatically heterosexual Cyrano that we find it hard to believe Adambrowne666 23:14, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
OK - I've fixed the link, thanks for pointing it out, Iralith. Adambrowne666 04:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Again, someone has removed the homosexuality reference. They have done it anonymously, and this is their only contribution to Wikipedia. Why? Do they feel threatened by this idea? I find the very notion that such a heterosexual hero of French theatre might be gay fascinating. The user was correct to alter the article where it said Roxane wasn't Cyrano's cousin, but they would be better to discuss the homosexuality matter before making such a sweeping and dramatic change. Yes, 'Other Worlds' doesn't categorically prove that Cyrano was gay - and in those times, there was far less of a distinction between gay and straight in any case - but there are numerous scenes (such as on the moon, when Cyrano is 'tickled to sleep' by young men) that strongly suggest that was his sexual orientation. When I have time, I will find those scenes online and cite them, as suggested. Also, I will amend the entry so it isn't so categorical - something like 'Cyrano may have been gay, as suggested by some chapters in his work'. In the meantime, please don't change the entry. Adambrowne666 10:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

My only criticism is with the link provided; Webb states flatly that he thinks Cyrano was gay, but doesn't explain (on that page, anyway) how he arrived at that conclusion. Could a more explanatory page be found on Cyrano's sexuality? Funnyhat 21:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
The quoted episode that supposedly proves Cyrano's homosexuality is quite weak in accomplishing this "mission"; just a reference to "three or four boys" who massaged a tired Cyrano, causing him to sleep in less than a minute. Not quite enough time for anyone to engage in sexual activities with somebody else. And then, mr. Webb goes and flatly states that Cyrano was gay [1], without explaining how he reached this conclusion. The way I see it, when someone makes a claim, the burden of proof is on them. To make what I just wrote more easily comprehensible, if I state that elephants have feathers, I have to prove it - it is not the elephants or the zoologists who have to prove me wrong. On another note, I think this "X or Y was gay" thing has gone way too far. It appears to me that there is a campaign to present deceased (usually) persons as homosexuals just to raise the social status of this sexual orientation; a rather gauche, I would say, manner of "proving" that "only homosexuals are intellectually or artistically inclined and/or important". And such is the spread of this campaign that one would quite easily conclude that a sort of "anti-heterosexual" racism developing. Elp gr 09:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
You're right, it is weak - I'll look for more - but be aware that such a thing can never be entirely proven either way - so note that I've amended the sentence to not be so definitive. I'm very well aware of the so-and-so-in-history-is-gay phenomenon, and I am certainly not part of the 'anti-homosexual campaign', being straight myself, but I do believe in truth, and when, after reading Other Worlds, and then seeing Don Webb's suggestion that Cyrano was homosexual, it just made too much sense to deny. I wonder if this argument would have continued for so long if I'd suggested Cyrano had, say, blonde hair. Adambrowne666 23:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Well, the burden of proof is on Don Webb. In my eyes, it is quite a longshot to claim that someone is homosexual or heterosexual because s/he fell asleep by receiving a relaxing massage from the hands of members of the same or the opposite sex. If Webb can base his claims on more episodes that can substantiate his conclusions, fine. If that's all he has... Oh well.Elp gr 16:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't know anything about Don Webb's claim, but having read L'autre Monde myself, I found one episode particularly ambiguous. While on the Moon, some of its inhabitants mistake him for an animal. He explains that he was captured and put in a cage with another earthling. As the other traveller was taller than him, the moon-creatures suppose that Cyrano is a female and the other one a male so they are left together in order to breed. Of course no sexual activity are described and Cyrano welcomes this as an opportunity to speak with another earthling. He then keeps refering to him as "mon masle" (my male). Here is a quote :
About a quarter of an hour later, the King ordered the monkeys’ keepers to take us away, and he gave the express order that the Spaniard and I be made to sleep together in order to multiply our numbers in the kingdom.
The King’s orders were obeyed to the letter. I was very happy with that, because I enjoyed having someone to talk to in my confinement as an animal. One day, my male companion (they took me for the female) told me what had really caused him to wander about the world and finally to leave it for the Moon.
I wouldn't call this a proof of homosexuality as Cyrano is used to shock and provoke (after all, he wrote a science fiction book at a time when even fiction was uncommon). The closer we have got to a proof has maybe to be searched in his letters (see my comment at the bottom of this page)--Iv 13:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

If you'll look at the links provided as citations, you'll see that it's not just Don Webb who makes this assertion. It is certainly true that there is considerable speculation about Cyrano's sexuality, not just on the web, but also in several books - as this article now states. Enough, I'm sick of talking about it; you're wasting my time. This is my last contribution to this discussion. 22:46, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Have your way. Speculation does not automatically become fact just because it is widespread. And if you feel those of us who are not willing to merely take your word - or Don Webb's - for it are wasting your time, then I cannot do anything about it. There are people who are willing to discuss their views. And then there are those who cannot tolerate criticism, skepticism and discussion.Elp gr 10:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
I remember having read something about Cyrano's homosexuality in the annex of the French edition of L'autre monde and États et empires du soleil. Sorry, I can't check now - I have not the book. Obviously, as said in this discussion, this is a supposition which is founded on some passages of his works (BTW, I think that there are other passages than the one cited), and these passages can also be interpreted differently.
But as wikipedians, we are not supposed to decide what is the good interpretation: we only have to report the existing interpretations and suppositions... Therefore, I think that the passage about Cyrano's sexuality must stay.
(And I will check for the book! I know that I did not actually give information, I'm sorry, I just wished you to relax :-))
Benio76 02:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I have been interested in the real Cyrano since I began to read some of his works. The letter that inspired Rostand's character Roxane was titled "Lettre à une dame rousse" (letter to a red-haired woman), this is a love letter. I have read somewhere (I hate it when "somewhere" is the best reference I can get) that the first version of this letter made reference to a man and was not signed by the author. It was later published under Cyrano's name and made reference to a red-haired woman. --Iv 12:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually I've read that many (if not most) of his love-letters were addressed to men. Althought, according to many literateur these letters are not sufficient evidence of Cyrano's homosexuality, surely he did not see homosexuality as a deadly sin (see "Les Entretiens pointus"). Henri Le Bret mentioned that Cyrano was shy with women, but he did not tell us about any male lover. Other suspicion that his friendship with d'Assoucy ended as a lovers' quarrel, and that famous capon was only an excuse. (D'Assoucy was imprisoned three times because of "sodomy".) The very same time he ended more contacts with other friends, like La Chapelle, for rather political reason. According to these datas we may say that M. Cyrano could have been/possibly was gay, but we are not allowed to state it as a fact. Sorry, I have not my sources right at my hand, so I just mention Jacques Prévot and Maurice Laugaa as my main resources.


The following is a Google scholar search I did for an article by Madeline Alcover entitled "Un gay trio: Cyrano, Chapelle, Dassoucy" which I will cite as a reference to help in the justification of the homosexuality claim (in response to recent edits). It is in French and I was unable to locate an english translation. I am posting it here as it helps backs up the statement "There has been considerable speculation among historians and other scholars about his sexuality."

Cyrano+Gay+Alcover

I'm going to try and compose a reference list for the article in general in order to give it a little bit more authority and help uphold the sexuality claim a bit better.

-- Holyalmost, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

It's still only speculation, not proven fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyrano19 (talk • contribs) 03:04, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Very little in history is - history is only ever one person's interpretation of events. Contaldo80 (talk) 12:24, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

"Nose" Bit Is Misplaced in Lede

The "nose" bit seems misplaced in the lede section, per WP:Lead Section. Someone invested in this article might consider moving it to a proper place for that type of tangential, but not quite unnoteworthy piece of information... And, if all else fails, don't forget that there is an article titled Cyrano de Bergerac (play). Cheers, ask123 05:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

There has been considerable speculation among historians and other scholars about his sexuality (that means he is a faaaaaaggg).

While I understand there seems to be some conflict about the first part, the parenthetical bit is almost certainly vandalism. However, it doesn't show up when editing the page. Is that a hack? I removed it (by editing, then saving. Removing then re-typing a space might have helped, I don't know.), but I'd still like to know what it was that caused the "invisible" bit on edit. Archon Shiva (talk) 13:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

At a glance, I'm guessing that the poster was so odious that his entries were outright deleted. Currently the history shows claims that someone anonymous added the "fag" remark on April 9 and then promptly undid it. I'm guessing that your efforts occured at the same time as the deletion resulting in this confusion. -- KarlHallowell (talk) 20:14, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Citing his name correctly

There are several places in this article where people have said "Bergerac did blah". Bergerac is the area in France where he came from. His surname is Cyrano. The word 'de' means of/from. First name: Savinien. Family name: Cyrano. Region: Bergerac.

Correct modern French usage: Savinien Cyrano de Bergerac. Possibly also correct for his era: Savinien de Cyrano de Bergerac (Savinien of the family Cyrano of the area Bergerac). Modern English: Savinien Cyrano, who came from Bergerac. Smangesable (talk) 01:41, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Lunar Beam?

What the heck is a lunar beam? Google only retrieves 5000 results for the phrase and none of them seem to refer to an object that would make sense in this case. The line has a citation but I can't find the information there. Someone who knows his biography should clarify the nature of his injury. Toastedcheese (talk) 21:32, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

lunar beam like a sun beam er? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.41.54.191 (talk) 14:46, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Slight correction

Here are the corrections and text posted within the article (the latter visible to editors). I decided to leave it in there (temporarily?) for reference verification purposes and such.
.....................
D’Assoucy counterattacked with Le Combat de Cyrano de Bergerac avec le singe de Brioché, au bout du Pont-Neuf
.....................
That wee comma is significant enough: placed between "le singe" and "de Brioché", as was the case before this correction, it changes the meaning of the title to:

"The Battle of Cyrano de Bergerac with the Monkey, from Brioché['s place] to the end of the Pont Neuf" - in other words, a somewhat epic confrontation, in the course of which the adversaries (Cyrano and the monkey) managed to traverse part of the city, fighting all along.

Whereas, placed between "Brioché" and "au bout", it provides us with the intended interpretation (which is almost correctly translated). For reference and as proof, see http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Combat_de_Cyrano_de_Bergerac_avec_le_singe_de_Brioch%C3%A9,_au_bout_du_Pont-Neuf

Incidentally, this article seems identical with the one posted on this site (including the mistakes, not corrected): http://www.stampland.net/?p=1469
.....................
Now for the second mistake: Brioché seems to have been a renowned maker of marionettes (akin to Carlo Collodi's fictional Geppetto), creator of none others than Polichinelle and Voisin, and whose creations were supposedly so lifelike, people reputedly mistook them for living beings. See excerpts from work in question for references to Brioché:

Après avoir portraituré Bergerac, venons à Brioché. [...] Brioché fut original pour les marionnettes, puisque certains, en certains païs, les croyoient personnes vivantes. Il se mit un jour en tête de se promener au loin avec son petit Esope de bois remuant, tournant, virant, dansant, riant, parlant, petant. Cet heteroclite marmouset, disons mieux, ce drolifique bossu, s’appelloit Polichinelle ; son camarade se nommoit Voisin, et manioit un violon comme Pierrot le Fort. Après que Brioché se fut presenté en divers bourgs, bourgades, villes, villages, escorté de Polichinelle et de sa bande, il pietonna en Suisse [...]. [...] en presence d’un peuple brule-sorcier, on denonça Brioché aux magistrats. Des temoins attestoient avoir oüy jargonner, parlementer et deviser de petites figures qui ne pouvoient être que des diables : on decrette contre le maître de cette troupe de bois animée par des ressorts. Sans la rhetorique d’un homme d’esprit qui prêcha les accusateurs, on auroit condamné le sieur Brioché à la grillade dans la Grève de ce païs-là, s’il y en a une, s’entend. [...]. Brioché servit de plastron à d’etranges bourasques pendant le cours de sa vie turlupine ; mais la mort de son singe le saisit et l’affligea si cruellement que peu s’en fallut qu’il n’allât luy tenir compagnie au delà du bateau caronique.

Having established that the name Brioché refers to a person, not to a geographic location, the translation should reflect this by changing "of Brioché" to "Brioché's", which I took the liberty of doing:
.....................
("The Battle of Cyrano de Bergerac with Brioché's Monkey at the end of the Pont Neuf"). --Tetracapillactomist (talk) 00:12, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Merge proposal with Cyrano de Bergerac (fictional character)

Same problem as the D'Artagnan article (See also here). The Cyrano in the play is not a "fictional character", he is a highly fictionalized version of a real person. IMHO, keeping separate articles is misleading. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 14:51, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Merged the articles. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 19:35, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Move

I think that this page should be moved to Cyrano de Bergerac, as the most important page with that title, especially since we already have Cyrano de Bergerac (disambiguation), which already does everything that Cyrano de Bergerac does and more. Two disambiguation pages for the same title is just messy. If nobody objects I'll submit the request myself. Euchrid (talk) 03:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 21:16, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 17:06, 24 September 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Cyrano de Bergerac (writer) → Cyrano de Bergerac – As all the other Cyrano de Bergerac pages (movies, plays etc) are based on this individual, his article should occupy the article Cyrano de Bergerac. That page is at present a disambiguation, which is pointless as Cyrano de Bergerac (disambiguation) already exists and is more comprehensive. Upon completion of this move I will place a hatnote link to that disambiguation page on top of this one. I have requested input from other editors on this talk page (see above) and received one agreement and no objections. Euchrid (talk) 22:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Support - it won't do anyone mislinking or missearching harm to discover he was a real person. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:08, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Support --Jaan Pärn (talk) 06:10, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Oppose - The historical person known as Cyrano de Bergerac is not as well-known as the literary and other works later written about him. Precedence of real history aside, if any article was to be placed at Cyrano de Bergerac it should be the article on the play. elvenscout742 (talk) 06:21, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Support I'm surprised that apparently there are people that don't know he's an historical person... Well, in that case, let them be educated, that's what an encyclopedia is for. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 07:08, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Support – This would also remove the anomaly in the lead of Cyrano de Bergerac (disambiguation). -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Support - per In ictu oculi. Mlpearc (powwow) 20:28, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Support. Especially since he's the subject of and primary character in the others. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:23, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Very poor article

The quality of this article, compared to the one on the French Wikipedia, is dreadful. It’s more about the fictional character than the actual person and seems really outdated in it’s assumptions. The fictional Cyrano should be mentioned here, but definitely should not be the main focus or take up most of the text!

I’ll try to improve things. ☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 02:48, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

For reference here’s the current structure of the French article:

  1. Biography
    1. Sources
    2. Family
      1. Ancestors
      2. Parents
      3. Abel’s (his father’s) library
      4. Siblings
    3. Childhood and adolescence
      1. Baptism and godparents
      2. Mauvières and Bergerac
      3. Country schooling
      4. Parisian adolescence
      5. A slippery slope
    4. At war
      1. Serving under the flag
      2. The swashbuckler
      3. Cousin Madeleine
    5. A new start?
      1. End of studies
      2. Courtesy and rapiers
    6. Encounters
      1. Chapelle
      2. Molière?
      3. The “libertins érudits”?
      4. Jean Royer de Prade
      5. Tristan L'Hermite?
    7. A “secret illness”
    8. 1646-1647: two datable letters
      1. To Monsieur Gerzan on his “Triomphe des dames”
      2. Against the fatty Montfleury
    9. The year 1648
      1. His father’s death
      2. To the moon
      3. For D’assoucy, against Soucidas…
      4. …and agains Scarron
    10. 1649-1652: four years of revolt
      1. The Paris Blockade and Mazarinades
      2. Living well with Jacques Barat
      3. “Les Œuvres poétiques” and “Le Trophée d'armes héraldiques” by Royer de Prade
      4. The serious trio of “Portraits des hommes illustres”
      5. The burlesque trio of “Parasite Mormon”
    11. 1653-1654: Goodbye to freedom
      1. Choosing a patron
        1. Jean de Gassion
        2. Louis d'Arpajon
        3. Jacqueline d'Arpajon
      2. Printed in quarto
        1. “La Mort d'Agrippine”
        2. “Les Œuvres diverses”
    12. End of life
      1. The blow and the injury
      2. A question of chronology
      3. Taken in by Tanneguy Regnault des Boisclairs
      4. The female evangelists
      5. Last days
  2. The works (in order of their publication)
    1. “La Mort d'Agrippine”, tragedy (1654)
    2. “Les Œuvres diverses de Mr de Cyrano Bergerac” (1654)
      1. Frontispiece
      2. Letters
      3. “Le Pédant joué“
    3. “L’Histoire comique des États et Empires de la Lune” (1657)
    4. “Les Nouvelles Œuvres de Monsieur de Cyrano Bergerac” (1662)
      1. “L’Histoire comique des États et Empires du Soleil”
      2. Commentary on the two novels
      3. The “Entretiens pointus”
    5. Apocryphal works or works of uncertain attribution
      1. The “Fragment de physique” (1662)
      2. The Mazarinades (1649)
  3. Bibliography
    1. Original editions
    2. Critical editions
    3. Biographies (more or less romantic)
    4. Studies of Cyrano and his works
    5. Supplementary sources
    6. Inspirations
  4. External links
  5. Notes
  6. References

☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 04:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Name

The only Christian name mentioned in his baptismal record is Savinien. Sometimes his name appears as Hector Savinien or Savinien Hector, though I’m not sure where this comes from. The article used to start “Hector-Savinien” but an anonymous user changed it to Hercule-Savinien.

The French article is titled “Savinien de Cyrano de Bergerac” and begins “Savinien de Cyrano, dit de Bergerac” (Savinien de Cyrano, called de Bergerac).

The engraving on this page is captioned “Savinianvs De Cirano de Bergerac”, showing both a single Christian name and the lesser importance of the de Bergerac.

I will remove Hercule from the article and leave his first name as simply Savinien. ☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 07:30, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Stop adding Rostand-derived works here

I have again removed the reference to Eino Tamberg’s opera which is based on Rostand’s play. This information properly belongs (and is present in) the article about the play. It’s a derivative work of a fictionalised version of Cyrano. This article is about the actual person not the character.

If we individually mentioned every work derived from that play in this article it would (& did) become completely unbalanced.

The section on Rostand’s play even contains links to the relevant sections in that article.

If the opera is not based on Rostand then by all means add it back, but make sure you also remove it from the other article (which currently says it is based on the play).

☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 05:59, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Transferring notes from the French article

The format for nested notes/references used in the French article is a little different. We need to change...

{{Note|« Text of the note<ref group="C">{{harvsp|Crespin|1570|id=Crespin1570}}</ref>. »|groupe=Note}}

...into...

{{refn|Text of the note<ref group="C">{{harvnb|Crespin|1570|ref=Crespin1570}}</ref>.|group=note}}

Note: {{harvsp}} Harvard sans parenthèses = {{harvnb}} Harvard no brackets.

It might be more in line standard practice here to remove or ignore the id= parameter on the {{harvsp}} template and change all the citations in the Bibliography section so their {{Cite…}} templates use a ref=harv parameter instead of manually specified ones (e.g. ref=Crespin1570, BUT I feel this would make cross-checking the translation more complicated at the moment.

It wouldn’t be too hard to do globally later either.

☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 10:25, 8 April 2015 (UTC) (☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 07:44, 13 April 2015 (UTC))

Further complications

The French {{harvsp}} template includes a texte= parameter for overriding the text that appears in the References section. This seems to be used in this article for references that include more info than just the page number so Author and Year need to be turned into parameters and the remainder (along with page numbers) needs to be moved into a loc= parameter.

E.g.

<ref group="A">{{harvsp|texte=Alcover 2001, tome I|p=461-463|id=Cyrano2001I}}</ref>

<ref group="A">{{harvnb|Alcover|2001|loc=volume I, p. 461-463|ref=Cyrano2001I}}</ref>

☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 09:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Another conflicting template

{{,}}

On the French Wikpedia this is a comma used to separate superscript note links.
Here, it redirects to a template that inserts a middle dot ( · ).

I’m replacing it with a space rather than using something like {{sup|, }} (, ).

☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 09:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Excessive quoting

Sorry Giraffedata, reversion is a little brutal—I probably should’ve done that as an edit. I don’t think it was “excessive quoting” because I was translating directly from a direct quote of a source, which is shown in the note. We should avoid editing source material and marking it out by quotation marks helps with that. ☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 05:20, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

OK, now I’ve read about why you really made the change I have to say I’m horrified. I don’t think you have a proper grasp of what a language is. If Wiktionary has a citation of the usage from 1657 and people also keep using it, that suggests it’s just a widely understood (and harmless) variant. Without seriously investigating the history of its usage, it feels to me like a totally natural English formation in analogy with “made up of” and your arguments about Latin suggest you’ve missed out on a few centuries of Linguistics. I will probably reword though to avoid your single-minded assault.

But what worries me more is the amount of time you’ve wasted on this Quixotic crusade—both yours and that of editors scratching their heads over this. All that time could have been used making articles better in more concrete ways.

☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 05:53, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

2 points: 1) you may also want to consult the Wikipedia article on the subject, comprised of; 2) your translation should arguably not be presented in quotes (nor can you claim protection of its wording as a quotation). But I concede that Giraffedata's (Bryan Henderson) cruisade is not undisputed – google it. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:06, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I think it’s still important to be clear about what is a quote even if it’s translated. How can we be clear about who is making what claim? How can we know if something is original research? You may be technically correct about ‘claiming protection’ but I feel like you’re qualifying yourself for a satire by Cyrano. I have no problem with someone doing a better translation, but I still think it should be in quotes to make it clear it’s not just the invention of some random editor.

Giraffedata seems to have only used the quoting as a pretext though and I have since removed the offending wording.

It also makes my job a lot easier if this article is fairly consistent in structure with the French article while I’m translating. ☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 08:02, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Article title

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
I am closing this no consensus. After discounting all the WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT comments its to even to say one way or the other. AlbinoFerret 20:26, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

I would like to propose a change to the title of this article and Cyrano de Bergerac (play). I believe that the most famous “Cyrano de Bergerac” is the play, not the writer, or, at least, that they are of equal fame. In either case, the writer is not more famous than the play.

Therefore:

  • Option 1: Move Cyrano de Bergerac to Cyrano de Bergerac (writer) and Cyrano de Bergerac (play) to Cyrano de Bergerac. (Support)
  • Option 2: Move Cyrano de Bergerac to Cyrano de Bergerac (writer) and leave Cyrano de Bergerac (play) as it is. (Neutral, may support as a compromise)
  • Option 3: Leave them both as they are. (Oppose)

Option 1

  1. Support - Not familiar with the author or play, but after a quick search engine test, I would concur that "the most famous “Cyrano de Bergerac” is the play". Thus, per WP:COMMONNAME, it would seem that dis-ambiguous Cyrano de Bergerac should point to the play, and not the author. NickCT (talk) 17:23, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Option 2

  • Support I cannot be bothered to dig up the relevant link, but as I understand it, MOS recommends that when two equally famous subjects share a name, the articles should be given a clarifying title of some kind, and a disambiguation page be created. Vanamonde93 (talk) 04:25, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Option 3

  1. Oppose – For the same reasons as discussed in September 2012. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:58, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Comment @Michael Bednarek: The case is completely different here. When this was being discussed, the title Cyrano de Bergerac belonged to a disambiguation page (totally unacceptable) and moving it to the article about the writer was the most obvious choice. Still, one editor during that discussion pointed out that the play is more famous than the writer, which, I believe, is true. This editor′s comments were not addressed then, and this is why I decided to request this RfC.--The Traditionalist (talk) 09:02, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Discussion

Note: I did not list this at WP:RM on purpose.

--The Traditionalist (talk) 17:09, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cyrano_de_Bergerac/Archive_1&oldid=1254685629"