Talk:Pasquale Paoli
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Constitution info
I'd appreciate any info on the corsican constitution. See Talk:Polish_Constitution_of_May_3,_1791#Corsican_constitution for some info I found. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:57, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] English occupation
English troops occupied Corsica between 1793 and 1796. This should be stated in the article. The sentence: "He then offered the sovereignty of the island to the British government, but finding no support in that quarter, he was forced to go into exile once more.." is thus quite misleading.
[edit] Commercial advertising content
Is it usual for Wikipedia to carry links to travel agents advertising their products? I thought this was specifically excluded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertChalle (talk • contribs) 21:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Don't give them any mercy at all, buddy, put them right up against the Internet wall. Remember Paoli. He didn't go around selling soap for extra money as far as I know. Hack that stuff right out of there. If you give them the slightest inch they will be pushing you all over Wikipedia making you think there is something wrong with you.Dave (talk) 02:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Interesting links
Here is an interesting link in the article that ain't got a thing to do with Pasquale Paoli. Maybe the author is under the impression that Rousseau influenced Paoli. A brief glance at the date will dispose of that idea. More likely the other way around. Rousseau is butting into Corsica stealing Paoli's thunder just after France bought the island on the sly and is now about to dismantle the republic. Furthermore since he is writing in support of royalist France there is absolutely nothing revolutionary about him at this point. The revolutionary is Paoli and he has to teach everyone else how to do it. The French Revolution lies some 24 years in the future. As the link is a good one and I do not know what else to do with it I am stuffing it in here where those who are inclined to do so can get it.Dave (talk) 02:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Google refs
I took this ref out of there: http://books.google.com/books?ie=UTF-8&vid=ISBN0521845807&id=iv41_FKFfUQC&pg=PA259&lpg=PA259&dq=partitions+of+Poland+absolute+monarchies&vq=Pasquale+Paoli&sig=_gaNILwINF5DvjzaXBXDld8Veek Power and the Nation in European History
In case you are wondering just what that is I will tell you. It is a reference to a page in a reviewable book published by Google Books. The book is good and the page is probably good but Google has pulled their usual fast and slippery one and has made the page unavailable now for review! I fell for the old Google review trick quite a few times myself when I first started using Google. You can't put a link to a page in a Google reviewable Book! Not only will it be dead shortly but such links have the form of a search string and take up lines and lines. What I do is use Google to get the page and the information and then do a formal cite book on it. If the book is downloadable I say that. Most people know enough to do a Google search on the book. If Google does not now allow them to access the page at least they know it is there. Unfortunately in this case the preceding and following pages don't give a clue to whether the missing page said that so I can't put it in. If you have the book and looked it up or if you CAN get to review the page by all means do a formal cite book on it. You can find out how to do that in the Help section. If you don't want to bother to take the time then don't work on Wikipedia. Thanks.Dave (talk) 03:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

