This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Champmol is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles
A fact from Champmol appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 January 2009, and was viewed approximately 539 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the monastery of Champmol was founded in 1383 as the dynastic burial-place of the ValoisDukes of Burgundy, but only ever contained two monumental tombs?
Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
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)Reply
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)Reply
Latest comment: 13 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
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)Reply
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)Reply
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)Reply
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)Reply
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)Reply
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)Reply
