Talk:Sébastien Le Prestre, Marquis of Vauban

Article

Included some material from http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/profiles/vauban.htm. See their disclaimer [1]: "You may print, reproduce, retrieve, or use the information contained in this History of Economic Thought (HET) Website for non-commercial, personal, or educational purposes only. If material is used for other purposes, you must obtain permission from the designers of the HET Website to use the copyrighted material prior to its use." olivier 07:30, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)

This is not actually compatible with the GFDL, which allows commercial use as long as further copying is not restricted. Stan 05:51, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Systems

More information on his systems would be needed. --84.20.17.84 10:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree, and in my Copious Free Time I might try to assist.
— However I'd suggest that a separate article might be advisable here, perhaps "Fortification systems of Vauban"? They'd be a detailed description for military architecture buffs, not biographers.--Andy Dingley 14:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Vaubans remains were scattered after the Revolution.

I've never posted to this site, so consider this an exploratory statement as:I can't be sure that I have not missed something.

I recently visited the home of Vauban, at Bazoches,in Burgundy. Nearby is the "Eglise Saint Hilaire," which contains the tomb of Vauban. This would seem to contradict the statement that his remains were scattered after the revolution! In fact, at his tomb, is a very clear explanation of how his remains were brought there, and also how his heart ended up in Paris. I have notes, as well as photographs, detailing all this and will dig into them in the coming weeks. This post is intended to clarify that I am not missing some plainly obvious point, before I spend the time to do further research.

Thanks

A/R —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.23.126.2 (talk) 00:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

File:Vauban-fortress.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Vauban-fortress.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Vauban-fortress.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Vauban's status

Sorry but this is not enough. See WP:EXCEPTIONAL. "foremost" of the entire world of the entire age? If it is widely held, there should be plenty of sources to support it. Britannica did say exactly this, only that was about Chevalier de Clerville.

No, a couple of times over. To begin, 1911 Britannica did not say de Clerville was the foremost military engineer of his day it says " one of the foremost engineers of the time". "One of" is significant. It says, instead, that Vauban was "the most celebrated of military engineers"; i.e., the big cheese, period, or at least to date. Now, in another source, this might confuse celebrity with reputation, but not here. Britannica was pretty good about that.

Now, certain mud-dwellers of the swampy Rhenish delta might wish to make a case for Coehorn, but real as his talents were, he never had the scope, living in a land where the water table was expressed in negative numbers, and a barrowful of dirt could create noticeable relief, capable of domination of the land out to the horizon... Anmccaff (talk) 14:18, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

PS: On a more serious note American Military History vol. 1 p27.

PPS: On a more serious note Sebastien Le Prestre de Vauban, marshal of France, may have been the foremost military engineer of all time. The New Encyclopædia Britannica, Volume 30 p37

Available for full discussion now - there's only so much I can do on a phone. Generally remarks like "best/greatest ... of his time/ever/in the world" are almost always reworded, as in "considered one of the best" or "considered by [prominent field figure] to be the best" (more rare). This is explained in WP:PEACOCK. This isn't an ode to him, it's an article describing him. It's automatically an opinion and to state it as such would breach WP:ASSERT. Britannica's "the most celebrated of military engineers" contains no conditional indication of location or time, and if - as you say - they did mean "most celebrated ever", why even use "of his age"? We shouldn't have to translate sources' remarks, and I myself would definitely contest that it equals "foremost military engineer of his age", which sounds a dozen times over more prestigious. For such exceptional wording there should be exceptional sources. A proper resolution would be to replace it with something like "... called "the most celebrated of military engineers" by Encyclopaedia Britannica." Tone is hard to read without body language so I'm going to consider that last part to be a joke and not a genuine remark about me being a "mud-dweller"... The NEB comment is notable in that it says "may have been", not "was". But it does show that sources praise him, which we already know. That's why it should be reworded into something appropriate. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 16:03, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

So, what would you suggest? Your last edit simply changed one unascribed subjective judgement to another unascribed subjective judgement, and what's the goudda that? Anmccaff (talk) 17:27, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Not sure what a goudda is but there are enough sources to call him one of the foremost military engineers of his age without it being subjective anymore. Alternatively, take one of the comments and directly attribute it. This would still cross WP:PEACOCK but it's quite common on the Wiki. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 15:28, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

In USAnian eye dialect, the attempt to convey in writing actual sounds of speech, words are often combined, sometimes with reduplication of connecting consonaants, if that's how the word sounds, sometimes with elimination of them, again, based on sound. "Used to" goes to "useta" but "good of" can go to "gooda" or "goodda." (Or "good da", obviously.) The "U" is added in this particular case just to be cheesy. Anmccaff (talk) 15:40, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Review Comments

• I would rename the Life section into Early Life, insert information on his childhood and education there. While splitting information on his marriages and children into another section. N Retitled Biography, but left as one section - I think its fine.
• Belle Mademoiselle de Villefranche - what does that mean? Translation in parentheses recommended. Y Simplified to Mademoiselle.
• Why is the Prince of Condé called simply Condé while Charles, Comte de Montal's name is mentioned almost in full? This is inconsistent Y
• "Louis XIV reportedly remarked sieges would ideally be conducted by Vauban, and defended by de Montal, but could only happen once, since they would kill each other." - This sentence is confusing. Y Too complex so simplified.

Catlemur (talk) 15:47, 24 June 2020 (UTC) Robinvp11 (talk) 09:26, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

• Vauban; note scar on left cheek, from wound suffered at Douai in 1655, one of 16 in his career. - No mention of this incident is made in the main body of the article and neither is it referenced. Y Changed caption.
• This inevitably led onto taxation - Suggest: This inevitably led Vauban to develop an interest in taxation. Y
• Note a is unreferenced. Y
• Remove all the semicolons at the end of the references. Y

--Catlemur (talk) 16:06, 24 June 2020 (UTC) Txs Robinvp11 (talk) 09:26, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

CoE connection

@Robinvp11: as real as the French Connection for USACE is, this wasn’t the only thread for the idea of state support of civil works. That was a real enough part of the British, Prussian, Dutch, &cet traditions, all of which had real influence on the early US. Dunno if Vauban’s real, but not exclusive part needs to be so prominently showcased in the lead. Qwirkle (talk) 23:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC) PS:Vauban’s influence on other nation’s military engineering policy as part of nation-building were also great, and not just for the obvious colonial dependencies. Again, such a particular focus seems undue in the lead. Qwirkle (talk) 23:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah no worries, I'll take it out. Robinvp11 (talk) 18:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Polite request to contact one of the editors of this page.

Hi all.

I applogies if this is not the done thing. I can’t see how you are supposed to contact the editors of the page.

I’m producing a podcast about Ile de re on the Atlantic coast of France and I’d very much like to speak to someone about Vauban.

I’m really just looking for someone who is well informed. They do not need to be a professional or an expert.

Apologies once again if this is not how you are supposed to use this page.

Is there a way to contact an editor so I can speak to them on the phone about Vauban?

Thanks in Advance! ConceptJunky (talk) 10:05, 9 September 2022 (UTC)