Talk:Emmanuel Macron/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Semi-protected edit request on 3 March 2021

In the section of 'foreign honours' there's a medal that forget. it is the :

"Proto-canon of the Papal Basilica of St. John Lateran (2017–current; the post is held ex officio by the French Head of State)"

President Hollande and Sarkozy also have it for inspiration. 90.74.26.27 (talk) 15:18, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — TGHL ↗ (talk) 20:01, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Co-prince of Andorra

The first paragraph should mention him being the Co-prince of Andorra (example: "serving as the president of France and co-prince of Andorra since 14 May 2017"). It used to say this recently but that has since been deleted.

If this is added it should also be listed in his information box, underneath "President of France". Something like this (properly formatted, of course): "Co-prince of Andorra Incumbent Assumed office: 14 May 2017 Serving with: Joan Enric Vives i Sicília Preceded by: François Hollande"

I understand that co-prince is an ex officio office, but this still should be briefly noted in the opening. This could also be added to the pages of the former French presidents. SwensonJ (talk) 22:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. Minor position compared to the President of France, which he is much more known for. Not added to infobox for conciseness, is listed when you click "More". ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 03:41, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Understandable. I wanted to bring this to attention but it's an incredibly minor change so I'm not concerned. And I agree that President of France is the much better known position. SwensonJ (talk) 15:05, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 June 2021

Marion.dbl (talk) 12:26, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

I would like to inform you that the Elysée website is now available in english. The proper link with the biography of Emmanuel Macron is https://www.elysee.fr/en/emmanuel-macron. Thank you.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --Ferien (talk) 13:54, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Serious problem with WP:UNDUE

Would any of the editors who have created a grotesquely oversized section on Macron getting slapped care to explain why they feel it is WP:DUE that Macron receiving is given much longer coverage than the section on economic policies during four years as president. The so-called slapping incident merits no more than 1-2 sentences.Jeppiz (talk) 22:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Ping: @LéKashmiriSocialiste. It doesn't need any mention whatsoever. A neo-Nazi slapping him It doesn't say anything about Macron, so it's not relevant to him, and it's only getting articles written about it because journalists know they'd get clicks from it. There's precendent for this - the 2016 Donald Trump Las Vegas rally incident isn't mentioned in Trump's article, there's no mention of Pope Francis slapping that woman's hand to defend himself, nothing about Leo Varadkar getting coffee thrown over him, etc. Best to stick to what's relevant about them, rather than being a chronology of everything that happens in their life. Uses x (leave me a message) 00:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry, I just wanted to be detailed. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 05:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jeppiz: Why exactly are you removing a source I added for citing a statement? Shortening doesn't mean you remove sources about a statement. It is a rule to cite a statement in an article with a reliable source saying so. LéKashmiriSocialiste (talk) 23:19, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Ping: @Uses x Not a single reliable source refers to the man who slapped Macron as a Neo Nazi. The sources that do are as follows: flipboard, buzzflash, random blue checkmarks on Twitter. That is the full extent of sources that say this. Can anyone explain to me how this doesn't violate WP:NPA ? regardless of if this incident is noteworthy enough to be mentioned on the page it isn't proper to throw around sordid accusations on a talk page especially when the man who slapped Macron is a named living person and from what I can tell there is neither evidence or sources to back up your casual insults of someone because they've done something that you didn't like. 2600:6C56:6100:1C:3DC5:66C1:8262:989B (talk) 05:56, 28 July 2021 (UTC) GaryMericanoGotNoAccount

On racism and discrimination : The right and Napoleon

I don't think we can reduce the position of the French right as one "admiring" Napoléon Bonaparte unanimously. It is a much more nuanced subject than this, as opinions on the Empire greatly vary depending who you ask, even in the Republicans, being the largest opposition party in 2022. If the far right will most certainly be admiring the Bonaparte dynasty on all matters, centre right people will tend to be more nuanced.

I seriously think this part should be reworded, or some sources should be added to back up such claims. I don't recall a LR Congress where everyone stood to "admire" the Emperor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMysterious Stranger (talk • contribs) 14:26, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Link to 'yellow vests protests'

In the first sentence of the second paragraph under the section 'Political positions', the internal link to 'yellow vests' links to the Wikipedia article for high visibility clothing, not the Wikipedia article for the Yellow Vests Protests. Please change the link to redirect to the appropriate Wikipedia page: Yellow vests protests. Stephanos100 (talk) 12:29, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for notifying us. Dimadick (talk) 16:39, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

first sentence

This should read "has been president of France." "serving" I do not see as a neutral term. 2A01:CB08:8BE:AA00:60D2:FB44:1D4B:D785 (talk) 15:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

How is "serving" not neutral in your opinion? --Roundish ⋆tc) 16:41, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Social democrat

The citations for some observers regarding Macron as a social democrat in the section Political positions are outdated. They are from several years before he became president, when he was a more or less unknown figure. I am not aware of many observers labelling him as a social democrat today, a lot have pointed out his rightward shift. Rousillon (talk) 22:31, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

RfC: Infobox image

Which image should be used in the infobox? --Bakir123 (talk) 20:51, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

• 
  A
• 
  B (current image)
• 
  C
• 
  D
• 
  E
• 
  F
• 
  G
• 
  H (current image)
• 
  I
• 
  J

---

• B, 100%. Uses x (leave me a message) 07:45, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
• A. The newest image that is not inferior in quality to others. Roman Kubanskiy (talk) 09:25, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
• B or * C. In any case not 'A' as the resolution for 'A' is so much worse (and less good picture as well, taken from the side). Jeppiz (talk) 09:34, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
  • A - 1227x1895, B - 441x630, C - 294x423. I don't understand why A has much worse quality, the other photos can't even be zoomed. Roman Kubanskiy (talk) 14:29, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

• B The head is larger and more visible. Honolulucb (talk) 01:11, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
• Close this RfC There are over 50 portraits of Macron at Commons. Why narrow it down to these three? We should create a discussion with all such viable images and then hold a runoff RfC to determine the image. ~ HALd'333' 16:30, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

  @HAL333 I put the first portrait as it was his most recent one and the other two as they are the ones that have been mostly used in his infobox. I don't see a reason to have a discussion with all of his portraits, besides, by looking at the ones that you linked, the three I put up seem like the best looking ones to be used in the infobox. Bakir123 (talk) 12:01 am, 17 June 2021, Thursday (10 days ago) (UTC+3)

  If someone thinks one of them is better they can add isdsdsdst above and leave a comment saying they added it, which is probably a better way to do it. I think the three above are the best ones. Uses x (leave me a message) 09:31, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

• B It has a good resolution and a better frame. Sea Ane (talk) 20:50, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
• B better quality. Cheep (talk) 21:29, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
• A, out of the presented options - The only one that looks like a professional picture, rather than a cropped phone pic. That being said, I'm also wondering why more options weren't added to this RfC. Might change my vote if a better picture is proposed. PraiseVivec (talk) 21:31, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
• C looks better imo, although I feel like they're all poor options as far as portraits of Heads of States go, perhaps a hunt for a better image is in order. LΞVIXIUS💬 14:56, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
• B It is a better quality image Spudlace (talk) 03:13, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
• B Reasonable quality slightly better than C, looking at the camera, aware of the photo being taken (i.e. posing a smile). Though open to other options on Commons, ping me if other options are added. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 17:44, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

  Ping Spy-cicle, per request for ping if new options are added. I may as well ping courtesy everyone: Uses x, Jeppiz, Honolulucb, HAL333, Sea Ane, Cheep, Levixius, Spudlace, BristolTreeHouse, 25 Cents FC, FMSky, Mitsurugi78, Vacant0, Lochglasgowstrathyre. Alsee (talk) 18:03, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

  Thanks for the ping, though I am probably going to stick with B considering the lighting on the newer options added is not as good.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 19:33, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• B It is a better quality image among the three. BristolTreeHouse (talk) 18:19, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
• C, Image quality may not be as good as A and B but definitely suits the article better.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣✅ 07:16, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
• C --FMSky (talk) 02:47, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
• CHe looks more of a statesman in this picMitsurugi78 (talk) 12:21 am, 24 June 2021, last Thursday (2 days ago) (UTC+3)09:14, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
• B Looks better to me than the other two options --Vacant0 (talk) 14:27, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
• Comment: I added a couple more files, look at them. Roman Kubanskiy (talk) 09:14, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

• A Newer, as well as a well shot photograph. However if other options continue to outnumber A by the time this RFC is closed, in that case count my vote as *C --Lochglasgowstrathyre (talk) 17:06, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
• B. *C would be a good secondary choice. I'm not sure if I select *B because it's a direct-frontal shot or just general esthetics, but it just seems a bit better. The background of *A has bold clutter that is distracting, and which makes it harder to take in the face. *D *E *F are a bit dark, and specifically the thumbnail-version of *G somehow creates or amplifies a somewhat awkward squinty expression. Alsee (talk) 17:34, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Well, D-F files can be easily lightened. Roman Kubanskiy (talk) 21:20, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
• B as first choice, C as second choice. Some1 (talk) 02:15, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
• B as it is a closer headshot that makes Macron more distinguishable than the other photographs. ––FORMALDUDE^(talk) 02:11, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
• B or J. 'B' is the most professionally cropped (is it also a proper 3:2 aspect ratio?) and as full frontal image it offers substantial detail (the indoor lighting is good but not great, though). I like 'J' because it features great outdoor lighting while nicely focusing on the (relaxed) frontal face, contrasting nicely with the dark green blurred background and the suit. I don't like the crop of J, though, as it is not properly centered (I am not sure if the latter issue can be fully solved, I guess it depends on Ms. May, but I would work on a new crop). I don't feel any urge to select the most recent one. As long as all the candidates are taken after 14 May 2017, I think they are all equally valuable in that regard.--Asqueladd (talk) 07:58, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
• Meh Don't fix something that ain't broke. Firestar464 (talk) 06:16, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
• B Looks the most like what an official portrait would look like. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 13:55, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
• H is most natural looking and looks like a profile image. B is too orange and unnatural. A is a side pose, so I am ignoring A. Venkat TL (talk) 14:36, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
• C is my chocie, it's more "institutional" and he looks more of a stateman. -- Nick.mon (talk) 13:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

More foreign policy in the lead

I think that the French withdrawal from Mali and involvement in Libya's civil war is as much important, if not more, than Opération Chammal. I bring this up because there is nothing in the lead about the former two (they're not in the article as a whole either) Rousillon (talk) 15:31, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

More foreign policy in the lead

I think that the French withdrawal from Mali and involvement in Libya's civil war is as much important, if not more, than Opération Chammal. I bring this up because there is nothing in the lead about the former two (they're not in the article as a whole either) Rousillon (talk) 15:31, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

The Russian invasion

• The subject is almost ignored. Macron's calls to Putin were commented by world media and finished, allegedly in May.
• Nothing about help for Ukraine. Xx236 (talk) 07:17, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2023

His fullname is Emmanuel Jean-Michel Frédéric Macron, and it should be bold at the beginning, not just Emmanuel Macron 45.64.241.111 (talk) 07:49, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Lightoil (talk) 08:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

It's already in the infobox. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 20:51, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Retirement age riots

Macron’s increase of the retirement age has caused riots to break out all over France. Because this change was pushed through by him directly via emergency powers, it should be included in his wiki. 136.57.164.226 (talk) 15:48, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Emmanuel Macron is the president of the Republic, head of the executive branch, he can't pass laws. Even "emergency powers" are a law, not in effect at the moment (and would only happen in case of a war basically). The raising of the retirement age was debated in the National Assembly for hundreds of hours, debated in the Senate and approved there, then went back to the National Assembly. It wasn't voted on because the government, through the Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne, decided to put itself on the line : either the National Assembly censured the government, or the law would be adopted. The National Assembly tried and failed to censure the government (for 9 votes, so quite close), hence the law is passed. This is all done in the legislative branch, no involvement of the president. He agreed with this don't get me wrong, but it's not in his powers to do it. We don't really know who decided to use the procedure. Aesma (talk) 01:39, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 April 2023

The arabic goose (talk) 21:56, 2 April 2023 (UTC) Pension reform

In March of 2023 Emmanuel Macron passed a Law Without a Vote in the French Parliament. The law Stated that the retirement Age would be Increased from 62 to 64<https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/politik/macron-frankreich-rentenreform-100.html>. In January of 2023 there were already protest about the increase law<https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/19/france-hit-by-nationwide-strikes-over-macron-pension-plans>. On the 3/31/2023 there over One Million protesters on the streets of France with that he lost Millions of Voters<https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/28/strikes-protests-france-macron-pensions-clashes>.

This should be added to the popularity section.

 Done in a different section as the popularity one doesn't seem to exist, and with rewording. Snowmanonahoe (talk) 23:53, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

See my above comment, the president can't pass laws. Aesma (talk) 01:41, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Adding Co-Prince of Andorra to intro paragraph

He’s also the head of state there so it seems relevant for an intro sentence. I would add it myself but the page is protected. mayawagon (talk) 03:28, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it should be in the intro sentence (or infobox, for that matter). Like how the vice president of the United States is by virtue of their office also the president of the U.S. Senate, the co-princedom of Andorra is held ex officio and is thus implied by "President of France". It is even less significant in the Andorra case because there's pretty much no power or responsibility associated with the princedom, so mentioning it (especially in such prominent place) just misleads the unfamiliar reader. We don't do it in any previous French president's article, either (only in the article text). — Goszei (talk) 04:53, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Ex officio or not, the president of France is head of state of Andorra. All other heads of state/government are recognized as such in both the infobox and the introductory sentence. This includes the other co-prince of Andorra, the Bishop of Urgell, who is recognized in his infobox and intro to be both bishop and co-prince. He also has no power or responsibility associated with the position. Neither do many ceremonial monarchs. The President of France should be no different. We should add this to the articles of previous presidents, not remove it from this one. Brainiac242 (talk) 17:10, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Every French Head of State and every Bishop of Urgell has been co-Prince of Andorra for centuries. None of them live in Andorra or is directly involved in its government. Like Goszei said, it is very much like the office of President of the U.S. Senate, that is carried out by the Vice President by virtue of being the Vice President. I would love to see you try and edit the page of Louis XVI to add "Co-Prince of Andorra" there. Go ahead. Try. And by the way, you first have the discussion and only THEN you add this to the infobox, not the other way around. M. Armando (talk) 19:00, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Macron cannot be THE ONlY current head of state/government not to be recognized as such in the infobox. Joan Enric Vives i Sicília‘s infobox has recognized him as co-prince for years without any controversy. His position is also ex officio. It doesn’t have to be in a different section though. Their infoboxes could say “President of France and Co-Prince of Andorra“ and “Bishop of Urgell and Co-Prince of Andorra“, similarly to Charles III’s description as “King of the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth realms”. Brainiac242 (talk) 19:32, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Don't think Macron's ex officio title should be included. We don't (for example) include Rishi Sunak also being Minister for the Civil Service, Minister for the Union and First Lord of the Treasury. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 21:16, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

• Going to agree it should be included in the infobox. Whether practically exercised or not, he's officially the Andorran co-head of state, and therefore of a sovereign nation. Personally endorse Braniac's position of adding it to the "President of France" title. The Kip (talk) 04:51, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Second Macron presidency which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:50, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Dead anchor link in infobox

The "additional positions" link in the infobox (underneath the "Deputy Secretary-General to the President" section and above the "Personal details" section) links to an article section that I imagine has been renamed, or possibly the article has been restructured more deeply. The current anchor link is to a (nonexistent) section "Offices and titles". Don't have time to check what it's supposed to link to at the moment, but letting anyone else know in case someone would like to correct it. superioridad ^(discusión) 16:07, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Merger discussion for First Macron presidency + Second Macron presidency → Presidency of Emmanuel Macron

NOTE, First Macron presidency (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Second Macron presidency (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) have been proposed to be merged into Presidency of Emmanuel Macron (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) See the discussion at Talk:Presidency of Emmanuel Macron. -- 67.70.25.80 (talk) 11:32, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Contents of both were forking of this article. Moved here instead. GenQuest ^"scribble"

Splitting this huge article

I split this huge article, per Size Guidelines, and it has been reverted several times now by WikiCleanerMan with no logical explanation, except what boils down to I Don't Like It. (WCM also seems to think that article splits and mergers must be discussed before execution, contrary to actual Wikipedia policy.) I have been very active at the Article Mergers and Splits noticeboard since 2012, and am quite aware of what needs to happen to carry these actions out. His reverting of the split is bordering on disruptive.

There are numerous reasons why articles this size should be split, not the least of which is, for instance: it takes my computer 15–20 seconds to even load (my puter is only two years old), also the content I split out had already been moved to the Presidency of Emmanuel Macron article, where it belonged. I found a natural breaking point (his presidency) in this article while completing the merges of two other articles' content (that were small content forks/duplications) to this article. The content of those two articles was part of the text I then sent to the Presidency article. This was all per MoS guidelines. Right now there exists a huge Content Fork and duplication between that article and this one. Note also, before I was even done with cleanup after working on these merges and splits for almost seven hours, WCM jumped in and started reverting everything in the four articles involved, even though I had "in progress" banners on all them all.

If there are any reasonable objections to this split, please present your case here.— Preceding unsigned comment added by GenQuest (talk • contribs)

I agree that this page is being inappropriately updated with information that belongs at Presidency of Emmanuel Macron and not here. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 13:13, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

I wonder when there was a need to split this article after the merger discussion to create the presidency article. It was never requested when I started the merger discussion and this article was never up for debate when I started the discussion. Please stop splitting for the case of your own IDT when you clearly were making disruptive edits even after when the discussion on the former redirect was self-explanatory. Article size isn't even being presented as a reason to split the article. Take a look at other presidency articles which contain a lot of the same information on the main article about a president and their presidency article. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Au contraire. It's you who were being disruptive. Article size is exactly why I split the article. I've explained that to you twice now. Also, this split has nothing to do with the merge request. They're two separate issues. The mergers you requested happened to here, instead of directly into the Presidency (former redirect) article. That little bit of merged material from the two articles then went to the Presidency article when I split this article off to there. Your requested merge happened—I just added a step in between. That content is exactly where you wanted it to go.

But now, your revert of the split has created a huge wp:Content Fork with this article for absolutely no reason. If you have a policy-based reason why the Emmanuel Macron article split should not happen, please let us know what it is. We're all still waiting—with bated breath. GenQuest ^"scribble" 03:37, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

This article was never invovled until you made it so. Where did it say the main Macron article had to be merged with creating the Presidency article? You never read the discussion. It was the First and Second Presidencies' articles to be merged to create the separate Presidency article. Edit history doesn't lie. @Killuminator, Estar8806, Keivan.f, and 162 etc.:, did the merger discussion ever involve the main Macron article? --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:13, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't recall the article on Macron's bio being brought up in either the original RM or the later merge discussion.

Nonetheless I think @GenQuest is right this article should probably be split. WP:AS advises to keep an article around 10,000 words or less, and this article is presently at 13,000 words. I've first off gone ahead and changed #President of France into a section of its own rather than a subsection of #Political career, there's no simply reason his presidency should not warrant a separate section. Perhaps the Presidency section could be trimmed down and some content moved to Presidency of Emmanuel Macron.

One of the simplest ways I can think of to shorten the article would be to separate the entire #Political positions section into a Political positions of Emmanuel Macron article and link that as a WP:HATNOTE in #Political career. estar8806 (talk) ★ 18:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Both articles were already content forks of this article, and probably should have just been deleted at that point.. The way I did the merge (to here) corrected that problem by preserving what VERY LITTLE unique information was contained in those two articles. Then I split this article at a natural break point. By reverting this article only, and not the Presidency article also, you caused a Content Fork/Duplication. If you're going to revert one article, you have to revert both articles—you can't have it both ways. I will gladly revert the split for you at the Presidency article; it'll take two minutes, and then you guys can work out what you want in the presidency article. Let me know. GenQuest ^"scribble" 22:24, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Don't touch either article. Leave it to someone else. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:32, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

All due respect, WikiCleanerMan, but GenQuest is right. The article should be split, but beside that we have to avoid content forks. And quite frankly, this sounds quite a bit like trying to claim WP:OWNERSHIP. estar8806 (talk) ★ 23:50, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

I've added the "too long" template to the page to discourage people from dumping more long text here. Info related to the presidency goes on Presidency of Emmanuel Macron, biographical info goes here. The consensus in this section seems to be that this entry needs considerable paring down. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 12:40, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

This is a BLP (reminder)

I recently had to revert a contribution whose source did not mention Emmanuel Macron even once. It appears that this page is being used as a general chronicle on everything that the government does or that happens in France. I would encourage contributors to keep in mind that this is a biography, not a blow-by-blow chronicle of every bill the government passes into law. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 13:04, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

This has been added back in, this time with a new reference from January 2023 that does mention Macron and a July 2023 source that does not, both supposedly supporting the claim that on August 1, 2023 Macron did something. Again, (for the moment) this info belongs on the presidency page not on the BLP. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 14:18, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

As commander-in-chief, Macron, just like all French presidents before him, yields huge personal influence on military policy matters. He was the one proposing the multi-year military spending plan in January 2023, so why not mentioning it in terms of domestic affairs? Even if sources are not centered on Macron, it's still a Macron-sponsored/Macron-led policy, isn't it? Frenchpolit (talk) 14:31, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Things he does as president, indeed, probably belong on the presidency article. I am a bit torn on this, but think it fits better over there. With the right source, it probably could also be contextualized there with the general rise in defense budgets across Europe, no? -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 14:35, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, indeed, you're right and obviously it could be linked to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Unfortunately, there are little sources apart from those regarding the different readings of the bill in Parliament... Frenchpolit (talk) 14:48, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

BRD: removal of excessive detail

I am opening discussion on this addition, which I have removed on the grounds that it belongs instead on the Presidency of Emmanuel Macron entry. Why am I mistaken? -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 13:06, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Removal of excessive detail is welcomed, but I think that my contribution (which I shortened) on Macron's role in the June 2022 legislative election results was welcomed too. The 2022 parliamentary election was to be pivotal to Macron's 2nd term and his 'tarmac speech' on 14 June was a fateful one and a rare occurrence of a French President overtly campaigning in legislative elections. Therefore, mentioning the speech, and how it affected the campaign and subsequent results, seems sensible -and should not be reversed.

So, let's find common ground? Frenchpolit (talk) 13:20, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

The common ground that I see us as being likely to find is that the largely identical text you added to the sub-article can remain there, though it may need to be streamlined. Others may disagree, either in favor of duplicating the info here, or in terms of its suitability for either page. I personally think a shortened version would be good on the article focused on the Presidency. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 13:39, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm basically ok with that, but I still think even a brief mention of his 14 June 2022 'tarmac speech' would be appropriate in the June 2022 legislative election sub-part given the role it is considered to have played in the final results. Frenchpolit (talk) 13:43, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

I'd be happy to see a one-sentence version! (sans trop de tiroirs :P) Also, with regard to this revert, I think you're both right and wrong. Since neither source mentions 10 times, adding that number (even if it's right, which knowing you a bit it probably is) is OR, and, as such, you should self-revert (the Le Monde article says it was the fifth use). However, you are right that neither article can be used to make a claim about the end of 2022 as they were published in October (FranceTVinfo) and November (Le Monde). -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 13:56, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Then, I'll try adding a one-sentence mention of his speech :).

And yes, it was used for a total of 10 times for both budgets but you're right about the sources so I will replace both sources by a comprehensive new source that mentions that it was used 10 times!

Thanks again for the feedback. Frenchpolit (talk) 14:09, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Fast copyedit

Read the article and did a quick copyedit as I went. Parts of the article were machine-translated, and suffered from the historical present and the differences of opinion that French has with English about when to use "the". Nothing unusual, bottom line. The.what tags include a rationale as a parameter and should be self-explanatory. I don't have an opinion at the moment on the split, but I do think that there's some repetition that could stand to go. I did not attempt this on this pass, just hit some low-hanging copy-editing fruit. Elinruby (talk) 03:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Political positions section

Since we're discussing size, the § Political positions section should be removed, and the few salvageable bits moved to the Presidency section. He's defined by what he did as president, not what he said in interviews. None of our well-maintained presidential BLPs have such a section. (The section was largely translated from frwiki, and follows frwiki's cavalier tendency toward journalistic rather than encyclopedic style). DFlhb (talk) 00:52, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with you on that:

1) A political leader gets to be defined by the positions they take as much as by the policies they implement... I think people have the right to know how a leader thinks about the issues a country or the world can face. Current leaders have not always been in power, they may have spent parts of their careers in opposition or even outside party politics, and, above all, every democratic leader has to campaign in an election to get in power: as an example, knowing how they thought/think before becoming the one making the decisions IS essential.

2) I've just taken a look at BLPs of the five most recent UK PMs: every one of them has a 'political positions' section. Honestly, why would it be different for the current President of France?

3) I agree this section should shortened and updated. Frenchpolit (talk) 18:39, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Don't see any reason why that shouldn't be split. Countless other politicians have separate articles to the same effect. estar8806 (talk) ★ 19:34, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 11:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

I do not think splitting is absolutely necessary, but if it is to take place, therefore the 'political positions' content should be thoroughly updated beforehand.

If there is consensus about it, I am not going to oppose it. Frenchpolit (talk) 14:25, 5 September 2023 (UTC)