Talk:Ségolène Royal

This page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as High-importance). Socialism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. France High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Women's History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ségolène Royal was a good article, but it was removed from the list as it no longer met the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated . Review: April 25, 2007.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 22, 2017.

The economy is normally central to any election but the policies section makes no mention of economics?

No mention of economics? I wonder why...

I don't understand why the BnF/Biblio.Nat.de France format is objectionable? The entries which were substituted for those were insufficient: non-French readers, particularly, will not be able to find things without publisher names and locations, etc. Also, why the elimination of those entries which were dropped?

--Kessler 20:45, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Max_rspct: so is it the eng.Wikipedia rule that nothing is to appear here that isn't written in English, not even book citations and links and references? So how are people who know English supposed to find out about people & events in the Outside World, which doesn't?

You said: "deleted long list of books (mostly hers) which are useless this being EN w'pedia".

The Segolene Royal bibliography, which I just restored to the article, lists 14 books: not very many... She is a leading French politician, currently favored to win the presidency of France in next year's election. Very little has been written about her in English. Most of us eng.Wikipedia readers want to know what's happening in that election, and many of us know French, so give us a break and let us read about it.

And how about discussing this in advance, next time, before you just dump somebody else's work? That's what the Discussion pages are for.

--Kessler 14:42, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's what I just replied to Max rspct, about his "cleanup" and "style" concerns here:

OK I see the Marty Meehan controversy, and I understand the need for unbias. But not for English-only... that would eliminate the entire non-English "outside world" from consideration/appreciation by us anglo-Americans, and the Internet has too much of that already, I think Wikipedia should help bridge that gulf not broaden it...

So how about a compromise: I'll add some English-language references, too, and make sure that some at least are critical of Royal or favor her opponents. A couple of the books already cited in fact oppose her, but I'll double-check that and add some others.

The "wikipedia's 'style' of bibliography" reference in your note interests me: would you please point me to an explanation of that, somewhere here? The format I've used is designed for user database / bibliographic software -- delimited fields, or at least fields they can delimit, equipped with tags the software can grab for its indexing -- the tags I've used are those of the Bib.nat.de France, just because they were convenient. Wikipedia has lots of school, student, library, researcher users now who will download these entries: beats having to re-key it all in.

--Kessler 16:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• First, sign your comments on the talk page. Look in the special characters box below the "save page buttons" its right there. Second, why is this bibliography so extensive? These article excerpts are quite lengthy. The information should be put into the article body, cited, and not left for a messy bibliography at the end. Joshua Friel

Could I suggest that the title of the programme "Tourism & The Handicapped" be changed to "Tourism & Disability" which is a more correct translation of "Tourisme et handicap"? The term 'the handicapped' and the use of the concept of 'handicap' is no longer considered appropriate (in UK English at least) and could easily cause offence. The title of the programme refers to the issue of how tourism providers and policy makers consider inclusiveness in the field of disability.

Eriketo 10:25, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Can one be a departmental deputy and regional president at the same time? It should be made clear that this is the case, unless this is a mistake due to tense problems.
• I think
  Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)
  says that "Ms." and "Mrs." are not used; "Mme." should either not be used or should be translated.
• What are her "conservative positions about child-rearing and
  gay marriage
  "? Reference to a specific quotes or actions would be helpful.
• On first reading, I assumed that François Hollande was female, what with all the business about same-sex relationships in that sentence. So I made use of the term "husband" (which is hopefully reasonably accurate) and that actually solves the "Mme." problem as well.
• Does the Paris Match article say that she considered running for President but decided against it, or that she is considering running? Unfortunately, that article is not cited (and I doubt my French is good enough to figure that out, anyway).
• I added {{unreferenced}} because none of the claims made in the article are linked to a specific source;
  Wikipedia:Footnotes
  explains a good way of doing this in wikitext.

-- Beland 21:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in reply to your posting on my talk page, I'm deferring your prose cleanup requests (above) to the original author of that, for a few days at least, altho I'll then do them if he doesn't: & no, "husband" won't do it... :-O I've removed the tagged format in the bibliography, as both you and he requested: reluctantly, though, as I said to you, as database software is in pretty common operation for bibliographies now -- but we'll discuss that over on meta-wiki per your suggestion.

In the bibliography I've left in the use of Mme where it appears in actual book titles, and other keyterms there are untranslated, as both are part of searchstrings so if changed would make for info retrieval nonsense.

--Kessler 20:31, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead on the prose too: to get the issues you pointed out resolved, Beland. Yes one can serve simultaneously as an Assemblée deputy and regional président: many deputies are local maires simultaneously, too -- the simultaneity has been much-criticised by political reformers, as conflict of interest, but it provides the power-base in French politics and seems entrenched. The use of Mme. is as undecided & controversial in France as are Mr. and Mrs. etc. elsewhere: I've left it in only where needed in the bibliography for info retrieval, as I said above. Her child-rearing & gay marriage positions are considered conservative by many, in France, but I can't find a good reference just now so I've dropped that line until we can find one.

And "husband" won't work... too "marital"... "Domestic partner" is the closest English / American phrase to the Royal / Hollande status, under the PACS: just the right legalistic nuance. The French term "compagne, compagnon" doesn't sound marital enough, in its English rendering as "companion", the idea of PACS emphasizing commitment as well as absolute equality. And there is much debate in France about all of this, ongoing & unresolved... But S. Royal is a strong & leading national partisan of her own position: no way Hollande is her "husband", or she his "wife".

The Match article was the first mention by Royal herself of even the possibility of maybeperhaps her own running. As such, in French political terms, it was the equivalent of a formal announcement... as vs. the Gen. Sherman classic conundrum, "If nominated I will not run, if elected I will not serve", which all US candidates use in their hard-to-get phase -- the French are much more circumspect about such political announcements. Prior to that Match piece there had been plenty of speculation, but no personal statement direct from Royal.

All statements should appear backed up by refs, now, so I've removed your unref'd tag.

--Kessler 22:44, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed a link to a blog because it didn't seem to have any info on the subject.

--Nussbaum 17:14, 13 September 2006 (CET)

Can someone pls find a better foto of Royal than the one currently shown in the article? Just about any would be better... This one is "official" and all of its permissions are in order, but... Need to have permissions in order on its replacement too, tho.

--Kessler 21:54, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just added this. A big merci to the various folks at fr.Wikipedia who have assembled a good article on S. Royal over there: much of this is cribbed from them, altho then translated by me :-). I'm not sure how many links to add to the line entries, as references / citation / justification: most would be to French language sources, Socialist Party & news items, altho the UK papers have covered her pretty closely too -- very little coverage so far in the US -- but others here pls link away, and I will add some more as I get to it. Articles critical of her on particular issues very welcome too: she has strong stands on women's rights and abortion and child porn and environment and protectionism, all of which have been controversial. FN publications, too, have taken her on. Links to all would be of interest, I think. Also anything about her Chile trip, and her foreign affairs views: biggest thing which troubles me personally about her is her foreign affairs inexperience.

--Kessler 16:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• What's the deal about this sentence regarding Jospin and a Quebec exile ? Is it serious ?Hektor 16:38, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about ? You might made a confusion with Alian Juppé, ex prime minister , who did an "exile" in Québec after troubles with justice and was recently reelected at the town hall of Bordeaux. lje 22/11//06

Are her children surnamed Royal, Hollande, or Hollande-Royal? (Alphaboi867 05:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

• The children, Thomas, Clémence, Julien, and Flora, were given the surname Hollande, because that was the only option the law allowed at the time. Royal has since said that they would have been given both surnames, had it been possible when they were born. Here's a link to an article about it:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/In-the-name-of-the-father--or-mother-or-both/2005/01/23/1106415461894.html

In the year 2006 FHM.fr's "100 sexiest woman", Ségolène came 6th. Does this warrant mentioning? Where? Gronky 12:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Only if we stereotype all female professionals (not in the entertainment industry) in this
  sexist manner. John wesley 18:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• So then, yes. --68.77.128.105

• It isn't sexist to say someone is 6th sexiest according to FHM. Actors get it all the time and frankly, it's nice to see some others in the mix. Lets not get too hung up on it and prudish, otherwise we may be discriminating against women politicians...........*Cross fingers France elects her* ..... :) -OOA

• How is that a stereotype? Is it a stereotype that female professionals are sexy? Is it sexist to label a woman sexy? John wesley, you find one person that believes female professionals are generally sexy (without excluding from the category Madeleine Albright) or name one woman that would take offense to being labeled as "sexy", then respond here with your confused chivalry. Taco325i 00:51, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it's not really sexist, just as it wouldn't be sexist if a prominent male politician was voted as one of the most attractive people in the world. However, I guess there could be a debate as to how noteworthy it is.--Victim Of Fate 12:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might added under a "trivia section", or a "popular media section. V. Joe 15:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it doesn't warrant mentioning in the article, any more than her shoe size or her favorite vegetable. FHM.fr readers already know, so that key demographic has been taken care of. — OtherDave 01:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since she has now appoined a campaign team and has claimed that but for machismo in politics the Socialist Party would already have united behind her as the candidate it seems that this page should reflect these facts as well as her overwheliming advantage in severao polls. It is pretty clear from what I see of the French media that she is very nearly the presumptive Socialist Party candidate. The language in the posting speculating about the possibilty of her being a "running mate" (to use U.S. terms perhaps inappropriately) with Lionel Jospin needs to be either eliminated or put into a past tense mode as speculations of some people. I have tried to accomplish this with my edit but others with more thorough knowledge of French politics might want to go further. bruce wright

Why does the article not mention the publication of pictures of Royal in a bikini, and her being suspected of having leaked the pictures herself? Snottygobble 06:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• A reliable source needs to be found that documents the subject. Would you happen to know of any? -- Beland 01:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• No; this was mentioned in passing a couple of times in Crikey, and I also heard a brief discussion of it on ABC NewsRadio. I came here for more information and there was none. In my view, the fact that I, an Australian, know nothing about Royal except for this tidbit suggests that it is sufficiently notable to warrant inclusion. Snottygobble 02:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Yeah I agree with Snottygobble. This is the only thing I knew about her before today, I read it in Time magazine a few weeks ago. The fact that she is confident appearing bikini-clad in public goes to the flamboyant character for which she is known. And besides, the fact that somebody older than my mother doesn't look half-bad in a two-piece is news-worthy on its own.Taco325i 00:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• It's not newsworthy, just as it wouldn't be if
  NPOV and is not in the business of judging swimsuit competitions. If there's a story that Royal leaked pictures of herself in a bikini, supported by extremely reliable sources, then there would be an argument for mentioning that. In the meantime, please keep any opinions about people's appearances off Wikipedia - it's one of the very few corners of the internet which isn't about women in swimsuits. OK, apart from the Women in swimsuits page. -- TinaSparkle 11:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]

If Heidi Hautala, a candidate in the 2006 Finnish presidential election, can appear in public naked (well, at an art class), then why shouldn't Ségolène Royal be able to appear in public in a bikini? JIP | Talk 15:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a picture of her wearing the famous bikini. http://hubpages.com/u/6913_f640.jpg --Energyfreezer 11:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Sex isn't as big of a deal in Europe as it is in the US. Something like this isn't noteworthy for a European politician. Perhaps that should be documented somewhere here on Wikipedia, but this isn't the article for it. -Rhorn 12:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some information about the recent allegations against Gerard Royal, with French political context, would be useful. (See Sinking of the Rainbow Warrior). Amygdala 14:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC) This has nothing to do with Segolen Royal![reply]

I added this tag to the "Political policies and career" section because it is a long list of accomplishments with no mention of criticism or popular reception of the policies or proposed policies mentioned. It looks like an excerpt from a campaign flyer or web site, not like a well-balanced encyclopedia article. -- Beland 01:27, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted an edit saying the family connection to the Rainbow affair helped her. In my opinion, the source article wasn't specific enough about these claims, and seemed slightly too editorial in style (you wouldn't get an article like this on the bbc news site). Looked more like an opinion-ed than a true article. Any opinions?

OK, forget all that, the guy who posted it looks like a linkspammer...

Yandman 12:23, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Every time I look at this article, I say "oh, pity, it still hasn't been fixed". Unfortunately, I won't be able to do an expert job - I'm not very knowledgeable about the topic. I will turn it into a more readable article though. I guess this article was originally written, or greatly expanded at some point, by someone, or some people, unfamiliar with Wikipedia. I will dump the stuff that is being removed here. Please re-add the worthwhile stuff. Please remember that this is an article, not a list. Gronky 19:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff between this horizontal bar and the next is cut from the article.

Local politics

• Recognition of
  Appellations d'Origine Contrôlée laws [1]
  ;
• Restoration of the Poitevin Marshes [2];
• Environmental measures including the planting of 10,000 trees in the Poitevin Marshes[3];
• Promotion of local agriculture, such as the parthenaise and maraîchine cow breeds [4][5];

National politics

Environment

• Law on the treatment and recycling of refuse (La loi sur le traitement et le recyclage des déchets) [6];
• Law to preserve the countryside (La loi sur la reconquête des paysages), followed by efforts to provide proper labelling for the products of 100 local areas (opération «Sauvons nos paysages, savourons leurs produits» -- "Save our countrysides, savor their products") [7];
• Law against noise pollution (La loi de lutte contre le bruit) [8].

Education

• Re-launch of the Priority Education Zones ( ZEP / zone d'éducation prioritaire);
• Creation of a government student lunch program;
• Implementation of language instruction as a priority in primary schools;
• Creation of a national home-tutoring program, Heures de Soutien Scolaire [9];
• Creation of programs for parental involvement in schools, "la Semaine des parents à l'école", and national campaigns for the elections of parent-representatives;
• Creation of local education and citizenship education contracts;
• Launch of "Initiatives citoyennes" for teaching children how to live together;
• Defense of children's rights and campaign against violence in the schools (Loi de juin 1998 relative à la prévention et à la répression des infractions sexuelles ainsi qu'à la protection des mineurs);
• Campaign against "hazing" of children (Loi de juin 1998 contre le bizutage);
• Campaign against violence and racketeering, implementation of an "SOS Violence" telephone number;
• Implemented mandatory civics instruction in secondary schools.

In January 2006 she criticized secondary school teachers who give private lessons outside of school hours, saying that they should spend more time in school. When a bootleg video of the speech surfaced on the internet in November 2006, the teacher's union SNES rebuffed her, requesting that she renounce her proposal.[20]

Clearly this is a woman who has never worked in education in France. The fact is that many teachers need to tutor for pay in order to live because the French govt doesn't pay enough.

Family and social affairs

• Law on parental rights and obligations (loi sur l'autorité parentale) ;
• Reform of women's rights and anonymous childbirth (l'accouchement sous X) [10] ;
• Creation of
  paternity leave
  ;
• Creation of 40,000 new spaces in French nursery schools;
• Social housing reform [11];
• Parental time-off provisions and financial support for child illness care [12];
• Special education support (parents d'enfants handicapés) ;
• Education support for school returnees (Allocation de rentrée scolaire) ;
• Law against the prostitution of minors (Loi contre la prostitution des mineurs) providing penal measures for clients;
• Law against pedophile pornography;
• Creation of the association "Childhood and the Media" ("Enfance et média"), against violence in the media;
• Creation of the "Plan Handiscole" for the education of handicapped children and adolescents, and their integration into life at school;
• Programs for transportation, mass and individual;
• Creation of the program "Tourism & The Handicapped" ("Tourisme et handicap") [13].

Articles

• "The French Exception : Ségolène Royal shuns party politics, extols law and order, and doesn't mind being seen in a bikini. Is this France's next President?", by James Graff, in Time Magazine, US edition, October 9, 2006, volume 168, number 15 -- "Ségolène Royal knows how to attract a crowd. When she walks into a meeting of France's Socialist Party, her mere approach is enough to cause a stampede of camera-wielding, sharp-elbowed journalists, who brush aside Royal's rivals for the party's presidential nomination. As she glides through the crowd, Royal, 53, coyly appeals for decorum. 'There should be some constraints, some respect for modesty,' she coos in a smoky alto. But the hint of a smile on her lips betrays her: she's loving it. And why not? So blinding is Royal's star wattage..." [14].

• "A Royal ruffle in french politics : Popular socialist could become country's first female president", by Elizabeth Bryant, Chronicle Foreign Service, The San Francisco Chronicle, Friday
  9 June 2006 page A-15. "Paris -- Could an unwed mother of four, dismissed by her own party's leaders as another pretty face, be the first female president of France?... A year before presidential elections, and with the ruling conservatives mired in scandal and accusations of ineptitude, polls put 52-year-old Royal way ahead of most of her Socialist and conservative rivals... More than two-thirds of the French public disapproves of the performance of both Chirac and Villepin, according to one survey published May 9 by Paris Match magazine. The same poll showed Royal basking in a 68 percent public approval rating -- 11 points higher than the rating of Sarkozy, the popular head of the governing Union for a Popular Movement party, who has made his presidential ambitions clear..." [15]
  .

• "France : The irresistible rise of Ségolène Royal : A flexible and popular candidate meets an immovable and less popular party", in The Economist, June 8th 2006 — "...party grandees are putting up stiff resistance to the candidate who feels fresh, looks good and has conquered public opinion: Ségolène Royal. When Ms Royal first hinted at her presidential ambitions nine months ago in Paris-Match, Socialist old-timers responded with scorn. 'Who will look after the children?' sneered Laurent Fabius, a former prime minister, of this mother of four. Others pointed to her lack of heavyweight experience — she has served only in 'soft' ministries such as education and the family. But the more she was dismissed, the more the public took to her. In a poll for Libération this week, 68% of Socialist voters said they wanted her as their presidential candidate, against 27% for the next choice, Dominique Strauss-Kahn... fears about security are feeding the far right. In one poll, a staggering 31% of voters say they want the National Front's Jean-Marie Le Pen to stand for the presidency... It would be foolish to bet on Ms Royal now — but just as foolish to write her off." [16]

• "Sarko v Ségo and a battle royale", By Simon Heffer, news.telegraph,
  8 May 2006: "...Eleven months is a long time in politics, but it looks as if the UMP's closest rival, the Partie Socialiste, will field the president of the regional government of Poitou-Charentes, the glamorous single mother of four, Ségolène Royal, as its candidate..." -- [17]

• "France looks to Sarko-Sego race", by Caroline Wyatt, BBC News, Paris, Tuesday,
  11 April 2006: "which potential presidential candidate has profited the most from French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin's discomfiture?... On the right there is his cabinet colleague, the sharp, ambitious Interior Minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, who is also leader of the governing centre-right UMP party. And on the left, MP Segolene Royal, the Socialist in stilettos, a regional leader who is hotly tipped as France's first real potential Madame la Présidente, overtaking her piqued male colleagues from nowhere. The idea of a Sarko-Sego battle has gripped the nation's imagination, with Madame Royal now the cover-woman of the moment, her elegant features smiling from the front pages of four of the country's leading news magazines this week..." -- [18]

--Kessler 22:00, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how Wikipedia works. You can't just dump lists on a page and then tell everyone else to either fix them or leave them on the page. The LGBT was the only subsection left because it was, by chance, the only subsection which was not of unacceptably low quality. BTW, the French language wikipedians have also written an article of lamentable quality, but I don't have enough French to fix that.

The current list tells me nothing about her positions. It's just a list of issues and laws with no significant indications about Royal's relation to them. For example, the first bullet point in the Environment sections is:

• "Law on the treatment and recycling of refuse"

Which tells me nothing about Royal's positions. Was this law in favour of recycling, or did it limit it? Did Royal support the law, or oppose it? And even answering those questions wouldn't tell me much since the devil is always in the details. Everyone is pro-recycling, but is their support lip service or is it gutsy?

This article is a shambles, and an embarassment to Wikipedia. Gronky 11:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh, I think the problem here is that Royal has no positions. She has been very careful not to take a stance on anything, so as not to risk losing a single vote. A list of her positions will therefore always end up as a vacuous list of principles everyone agrees with. yandman 12:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

She can't be completely without positions, but the point is that Wikipedia should say her positions, to the extent that she has any, and shouldn't print these vacuous lists. Gronky 13:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Gronky that this list needs to be fixed. I would have done it myself, but I don't speak French. And I don't think we can fairly say that "she takes no positions", as the list currently in the article is fairly long, wouldn't you say? · j e r s y k o talk · 13:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You misunderstand me. The list is long, but it is filled with laws which passed with overwhelming majority, for some of which she has done nothing more than vote, that everyone agrees with. I don't think we can call these "positions". I think this whole section should go, as it's just an ad. yandman 13:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone pls post an example here of how the "list" should read, as not-a-list, assuming that the positions it suggests really are valid? I can check on how valid they are, in French, and others who know French can, and we can present that here. But assuming she really does represent the positions suggested, I am curious to know how text would be more effective here than a bulleted list? The article needs something about her political positions: simply presenting the campaign LGBT issues as-seen-by-American-eyes, as the previous edit did, distorts the article.

--Kessler 01:01, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"How the list should read" is the wrong line of thinking. Wikipedia does not exist to store that list, it exists to make informative encyclopedia articles about notable topics. The right question is: how should Ms. Royal's positions be documented in this article.

There seems to be consensus that the current list is not a good way of informing people about Ms. Royal. Action #1 is that the list should be removed. I can do that. Action #2 is that someone should write something good. That is a separate action. It is acceptable for the article to be in an imperfect state while action #1 is done and people are waiting for someone to do action #2. I can't do that, but people will be able to do this. I have no preference for what the article says about LGBT issues, I haven't even read that section, I just skimmed it. And trying to guess where my eyes, or any other contributor's eyes, are from is off-topic. Gronky 11:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK I'll do a re-write of that "3.1 Local politics" section -- you guys pls have a look and post here whether it's OK -- if it is I'll try the same "style on the others. There are links substantiating that these are in fact Segolene Royal positions, and not just "votes" -- someone asked about that -- and I'll incorporate those. Sorry for the crack about the location of your eyes, Gronky, yes that was off-topic.

--Kessler 20:43, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That does look better... point made, Gronky :-)... I'll re-do the others the same way: if I spot any "she only voted" so-called policies of Royal's, per the French news report links, I won't include them. But she has been around a long time and has done quite a bit, so I personally think the suggestion someone made here that she has "no" policies is just personal opinion and POV. Sarkozy has policies too, and those need to be presented well on his page -- Le Pen too, also others -- the whole point of a major politician is the actual policies they promote, otherwise an encyclopedia article becomes just a People Magazine gossip-piece.

--Kessler 20:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's done. It does read better... even if I still am a "bulleted list" fan, myself... I've tried to verify each point against citation links, but there is a lot here, so I hope others will be patient and add links too if & when they can find them. French-language websites listed below in external links, including Royal's own party and her own website, are good sources -- and she is getting plenty of coverage in the French national press. Important not to look like just a campaign ad, but I think it doesn't, & yes the "text" format does help, for that: a clear picture of her policies & priorities and what she represents for France emerges, I believe -- NPOV, and usefully compared to similar policies & priorities descriptions of other French leaders, Sarkozy & Fabius & Le Pen and others.

--Kessler 21:41, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you've really turned that section around. It looks very good now, and it will be a lot easier for others to also collaborate on. Thanks. Gronky 09:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I question the size of the chapter "LGBT". In my opinion, Gay issues are neither significant in her achievements nor in her political speeches. Specifically :

• the "Happiness of Loving" pack is largely unknown and if it existed, it was probably not focused on homosexuality. One shall remove as unsubstantiated and irrelevant the three sentences "She later introduced ... discrimination which they face abroad".
• the 2002 law does not give "legal recognition to families with gay parents". In fact, the word gay does not appear, on the contrary the law refer to article 377: father and mother, together or separately. One shall at least rewrite the sentence has "A law (...) allowed a parent to ask a judge to share his/her parental authority with a partner". The correct reference in the civil code is 377 and 377-1.

--Geo115fr 01:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article says she has a "partner". I can see the motivation - we want to be politically correct and not give away whether it's a man or a woman because same sex relationships are the same as mixed sex relationships, etc. etc. etc. But "partner" is a stupid word because it doesn't explain the relationship between Ms. Royal and the person of unsaid sex. What is the correct word? "Live-in parter", "lover", "boyfriend", "significant other"? I don't want to distract from the much more important discussion above about generally improving the article, but this word could be improved. Gronky 18:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Boyfriend" seems to denote something less than what Royal and her partner are, as they are bound under a

pacte civil de solidarité. I believe "partner" is the preferred nomenclature for such a circumstance. · j e r s y k o talk · 21:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

--Kessler 00:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe "civil partner" would be more correct - from civil union just to clarify that it's not her running parter in the election or some other policital partner. Gronky 12:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, that works. · j e r s y k o talk · 13:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Civil partner" sounds good to me: translates OK into French, I think -- at least doesn't sound too casual -- and the "civil" part of it in English does indicate legality.

--Kessler 20:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has now reverted this to "girlfriend". I am a bit reluctant to revert it back as I'm an occasional user and am not sure what the guideline for such a case is. Thermaland 15:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, help me to find a more appropriate translation for "Désirs d'avenir", I'm not a native english speaker. The present one ("Wishes for the future") is plainly wrong:

• In french, the word "wishes" means "souhait". Souhait/Wishes has a weaker meaning, and other connotations than the original "desire" word (which also imply a "lust" meaning).
• It is grammatically incorrect. "for the future" would rather be a translation of "pour l'avenir" (i.e. "désirs pour l'avenir"). "Désirs d'avenir" means that the future itself is desired (not that the desires are "for the future"). This has strong connexions in the french context (where Ms Royal claims to fight against "déclinistes", or defeatism and lack of confidence for the future or France, kind of "no future" culture).

Thanks.

"Wishes for future" would be my best guess, edited it that way. We still need a native speaker to correct that. I'm not sure if the article is required ("Wishes of a future"). KungFuMonkey 03:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, "wishes for future" seems better, more accurate to me (but I'm not a native english speaker). Thanks !

Benjamin.pineau 13:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

"Désirs d'avenir" translates to "Desires for the future" I think that's the word your looking for. I made the change in the article. Gordie 13:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. Look at the second note above : "for the future" doesn't carry an important connotation (in "désir d'avenir", the "avenir"/futur itself is desired/wished). Maybe a mix of both your propositions would be better, ie. "Desires for future" (without "the") ? I can't tell, given my english skill.

Benjamin.pineau 12:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

"for the" should possibly be changed to "for a" or "of a" "Désirs d'avenir" means desire for an unspecified futur. I'm not sure if this makes more sense. My english isn't as good as my french. I was mostly changing the word "wish" to "Desire" since that is the actual translation of thte word.Gordie 11:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I realize we forgot the plural. So I've put "Desires of (a) future" now : plural plus desire of an unspecified future. Sounds OK to me. KungFuMonkey 02:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just opinion here: Don't get too hung up on an article or lack of it; French and English don't use them in the same way. (In fact, English doesn't always use them the same way, which explains why an American goes to THE hospital, while a Brit drops the "the."

The BBC translates the organization's name as "Future Desires," which while avoiding the article falls pretty flat.

I wonder if the attempts at translation are too literal. To me, there's a sense of hope or vision or goals for the future -- especially the sweeping sort that politicians in every country tend to make. I do realize "Hopes for the Future" would result in an entire archive full of translation discussion. —OtherDave 02:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody add an IPA pronunciation of her name? With all those accent marks going different ways, I don't even know where to begin in pronouncing her name. Taco325i 00:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the IPA. Looks like an anonymous IP had removed it on October 25 without explanation. --Cam 03:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its Saygo Len.

Could some native French speaker record it or could someone find a public domain recording of this pronunciation?

Well I'm not a native French speaker, but I did my best: . If a native french speaker feels they can do better please overwrite my recording. jaco♫plane 11:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a native french speaker and I think that this recording is perfect ; that's the right pronunciation.

Benjamin.pineau 13:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

The IPA, however, was not. It's [rojal], not [rwajal]. I corrected it.

Peter ^Isotalo 16:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the IPA for the word "royal" in a Larousse dictionary I have, I believe the correct way to IPA it in French is as I had written it, with a "wa" in the middle. --Cam 04:45, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I checked it out in the concise French phonology in the The handbook of the International Phonetic Association, and the combination oy is indeed pronounced [waj], not [oj]. It's odd that a French speaker claimed that the pronunciation file contributed by Jaco was "perfect" because it's very clearly [rojal], not [rwajal]. There is a native pronunciation in the French language article, but it's of such abysmally low sound quality that I recorded my own for now.

Peter ^Isotalo 11:16, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for correcting that. jaco♫plane 11:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm french. The pronunciation media file must be re-recorded cause it sound likes "ségolin rwayal" in french. (I can't do that myself)

Sorry, but I still find the former recording better. The new one (Fr-Segolene_Royal.ogg) doesn't sound like a native's pronunciation (while the former sounds native to me) : the end of the given name sounds like mine ("-in" as in Benjamin, not "-ène" as in Ségolène). Well, ok, I recorded it myself. My micro is cheap but I tried to pronounce slowly. That's french from Paris, France (may differ from Belgium or Quebec's accent). Ogg file there. If you find it useful, consider this public domain and upload it if you want (I still don't know how to upload medias).

Benjamin.pineau 11:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

No one claimed that it was native (see the file info), just that the [rwa]-sequence be foucsed on. The difference between that an [roj] is way too major to ignore.

Uploading is not difficult. Just follow this link to the upload form at

Wikipedia Commons

. Don't use the accent marks in "Segolene" for the file name, though. They're unnecessary just for the file name (nothing do disambiguate from) and they make it a lot more difficult for a lot of browsers and players to handle the file. Name it fr-Segolene_Royal.ogg and just overwrite the existing file.

Peter ^Isotalo 14:02, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Peter I didn't want to offend, and yes the [rwa] is ok and maybe better than in the first proposition (at least the [wa]). Given my cheap mic and soundcard, I don't know if the recording quality is sufficient (clear enough to figure the pronunciation) to be uploaded: what's your opinion ?

Benjamin.pineau 15:10, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm only offended by incility and you haven't been rude, so don't worry. Pointing out errors in pronunciation as a native speaker is perfectly acceptable as long as it's not done like this.

The quality of your sound file is quite sufficient, but I would recommend making another recording and not speaking directly into the mic. The recording you linked to is a tad too loud.

Peter ^Isotalo 16:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the tips Peter. The recording isn't still so good (but better, let say the mic is guilty ;) and I removed all non-

Benjamin.pineau 21:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

• "Royal wins race to run for presidency" by Charles Bremner, Fri Nov 17 -- Ségolène Royal, the left-wing favourite for the French presidency, emerged triumphant last night after party members anointed her by a heavy majority as the Socialist candidate in the elections next spring..." [20]

• "Tight race as France's Royal faces first hurdle for presidency" by Hugh Schofield, Sun Nov 12 -- PARIS (AFP) - "Ségolène Royal, the socialist with high hopes of being France's first woman president after elections in April, has said that she was confident of victory in this week's vote for the party nomination despite a narrowing lead over her two more experienced rivals. With four days to go till Thursday's internal vote by Socialist party (PS) members, the 53-year-old former junior minister said that she had emerged strengthened from a month of primary campaigning including six debates with opponents Laurent Fabius and Dominique Strauss-Kahn. 'It was the other two who wanted these debates because they doubted my capabilities ... But at the end of the process my legitimacy is no longer in question,' she told Le Journal du Dimanche newspaper. 'I am the only one who can win against the right. I embody the profound change that people are crying out for. Many see me as the candidate against the powers-that-be .... For the symbolic father of the nation to be a woman -- now that's a revolution,' she said Sunday. A new poll Sunday showed that Royal, who has emerged from nowhere in a year to be France's most talked-about politician, enjoys a clear majority of support -- 58 percent -- among PS sympathisers, with former finance minister Strauss-Kahn on 32 percent and former prime minister Fabius on nine..." [21]

• "Royal rises to the occasion in debate" International Herald Tribune, Oct 18 3:54 PM -- "Ségolène Royal was generally considered to have kept her status as the front-runner after the debate with two former finance ministers, Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Laurent Fabius, although some said Strauss-Kahn had performed best of the three in the debate itself..." [22]

• "Royal leads Sarkozy in French presidential poll" Paris, Oct. 16 (Xinhua) -- "The socialist Ségolène Royal has increased her lead over her rival, the current interior minister Nicolas Sarkozy by two points, according to a poll published on Monday. Royal would defeat Sarkozy, head of the ruling Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) by 51 percent to 49 in a runoff, the poll for the French daily Le Figaro showed on Monday. If Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin was standing instead of Sarkozy, he would be beaten by Royal in the election's decisive second round by 60 percent to 40, while Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie would get only 37 percent..." [23]

• "The French Exception : Ségolène Royal shuns party politics, extols law and order, and doesn't mind being seen in a bikini. Is this France's next President?", by James Graff, in Time Magazine, US edition, October 9, 2006, volume 168, number 15 -- "Ségolène Royal knows how to attract a crowd. When she walks into a meeting of France's Socialist Party, her mere approach is enough to cause a stampede of camera-wielding, sharp-elbowed journalists, who brush aside Royal's rivals for the party's presidential nomination. As she glides through the crowd, Royal, 53, coyly appeals for decorum. 'There should be some constraints, some respect for modesty,' she coos in a smoky alto. But the hint of a smile on her lips betrays her: she's loving it. And why not? So blinding is Royal's star wattage..." [24].

• "A Royal ruffle in french politics : Popular socialist could become country's first female president", by Elizabeth Bryant, Chronicle Foreign Service, The San Francisco Chronicle, Friday
  9 June 2006 page A-15. "Paris -- Could an unwed mother of four, dismissed by her own party's leaders as another pretty face, be the first female president of France?... A year before presidential elections, and with the ruling conservatives mired in scandal and accusations of ineptitude, polls put 52-year-old Royal way ahead of most of her Socialist and conservative rivals... More than two-thirds of the French public disapproves of the performance of both Chirac and Villepin, according to one survey published May 9 by Paris Match magazine. The same poll showed Royal basking in a 68 percent public approval rating -- 11 points higher than the rating of Sarkozy, the popular head of the governing Union for a Popular Movement party, who has made his presidential ambitions clear..." [25]
  .

Added current event status Cyclonenim 16:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to include some criticism of Ségoléne ? Ericd 06:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed at the moment one gets the impression that her secretary wrote it! Johncmullen1960 08:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Why not? You see a "Criticisms" section in almost every other article found on Wikipedia. You must be new to this.

—The preceding

unsigned comment was added by Shadowrun (talk • contribs) 09:46, 18 November 2006 (UTC).[reply

]

I'm not new. It was a bit ironic... Ericd 15:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

She hadn't much responsibilities in a government so far, so it's hard to criticize her action (nation wide). And since she is candidate for presidential election, she speaks very carefully. Anyway, here are the most commons criticisms about her I've seen in the press (in France, mainly) (disclaimer : this doesn't reflects my own views) :

• From both right and left camps : she hadn't proven her competence so far, she never had much responsibilities (like being prime minister, or heading a sensitive minister like minister of economy). Beware, sometime this was told with an implicit machist POV (like : "a woman can't be competent enough to be president").
• From left-wingers : she looks too rightist or conservative (because she claimed that Tony Blair is a good model -Blair is perceived as very rightist by french left-, because she suggested to send young offenders under military management rather than jail, because the criticized the 35-hour workweek, because her conservative views about family, etc.). A video where the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu explained that she isn't leftist was uploaded on YouTube by the way (this illustrates well a common feeling among leftists).
• From both sides : she is too
  populist or something like that), because she like -or accepts- being photographed, even in bikini in low-end tabloids, because she suggested to create "popular juries" (that would judge elected actions), because she is a strong proponent of participatory democracy
  and because she doesn't seems to have a very deep and theoretical/abstract/global approach (favoring simple and easy to understand concrete examples in her public speechs). Right-wingers often says that she has no "grand project".
• From rightists and from British press : her project isn't realistic from an economic standpoint. Her words sounds sometimes [[marxist]s.
• From right-wingers : she don't have new ideas (by difference to her opponent, Nicolas Sarkozy which want to be perceived as "disruptive"). The far-right (nationalist) politician Jean-Marie Le Pen calls her "Sarkolène", a compound word from Sarkozy and Ségolène, to show that they aren't very different and have no strong ideas.

Sorry, I can't write such a section in the main article myself, my english skills are too low for the english wikipedia.

Well, after re-reading the whole article, I thought that most of those criticisms are already included in the text (except for the "lack of realism in economic positions" criticism). They may not be clearly identified as criticisms by foreigners because they are to be referred to France's internal conflicts (so far, since she's not elected and hadn't conduced any significant international actions, most criticisms still comes from France, and have to be understood in french politics problematics/opposition), and because they are not strong worded (or underlined as in "hey, this is a criticism") in the article (but that's a requirement for a neutral style, I guess).

Benjamin.pineau 13:22, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

I'd like to see some information detailing her economic beliefs and plans, if anyone may know where to find relevant sources.RyanLivingston 19:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you can read french (or maybe by using babelfish or google translators) you can give a look at the economic section of the

Benjamin.pineau 12:05, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Good luck... As of today nobody knows what are the economic beliefs and plans of Ségoléne Royal. Maybe Ségoléne Royal herself knows but a lot of people believe she has no belief or plan :-). Ericd 12:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For its use of citations, good prose and broad coverage I have passed this article as a Good Article. Morgan695 20:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's an insufficient review. LuciferMorgan 21:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello; could you please add the turkish wiki link at the end please ? I tried but couldn't (even though I'm an old member) the link would be "tr:Ségolène Royal". Thanks for your help, --Nerval 13:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I find it strange you couldn't edit it tho. Perhaps there is a contrib requirement altho you have quite a few so would think you'd qualify. Sure it wasn't a temp problem? Nil Einne 22:46, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

there is this official promo video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w0mOkBwqNE&feature=PlayList&p=DB7512ADC0C24348&index=1) circulating over internet. it seems to be Segolene Royale's anthem for the 2007 presidential elections. as a french socialist party campaign material it could be probably added to the article as an external link, what do you think? BITE DACIER 04:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Youtube clip linked to above is a montage with an obscene song. Please no one link to this from the article. Thermaland 21:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In fact,

Benjamin.pineau 16:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Indef blocked. yandman 16:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opposed. See the debate on this page about Gérard Royal and allegations about him on his page. I have no idea whether there is any substance to these allegations but, if there is, he is certainly notable in his own right. Moreover, he is likely to become more notable if Ségolène Royal's career continues to progress. I also don't think the allegations about Gérard Royal are relevant to an article on his sister unless she is involved. -- TinaSparkle 19:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Even the articles about the children of the sitting French president, Jacques Chirac, have been merged with his article, see Claude Chirac. And Claude Chirac is much more notable than Gérard Royal, since she had an official role as presidential advisor. Here we are only talking about the brother of a candidate to the presidency. We need to be consistent. Hektor 19:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Gérard has an article because he is the alleged murderer in a very famous case, not because he is "the brother of a candidate to the presidency". As an aside: this merge has not been proposed in the right way, I think. There are discussions on two pages, here and on Talk:Gérard Royal. Skarioffszky 18:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Biographies should be on separate pages and his Rainbow Warrior link merits an own article for him. -- fdewaele 5 December 2006, 19:05
• Oppose It's quite plain that this should not occur. I urge removal of the tag from the articles. MKV 02:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The unnamed user with the IP address 82.146.104.188 has now twice made edits for which I believe are POV. The tone of language used seems to suggest dislike of Segolene Royal. I reverted the edits but they have now put them back, and has claimed it isn't vandalism. I'd like to see what you think and we can reach a concensus on this issue. Jamandell (d69) 23:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read the changes and I thought there was at least one interesting point in relation to Muslims joining the Socialist Party and affecting the recent vote. But, the comments are unquestionalbly POV and cite no sources, and it is easier to rv them rather than examine each change individually and then delete them (although strictly speaking they are not vandalism).--Grahamec 01:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. I reverted this diff again. Beside many POV comments (like the thing about her being elected by antisemits Muslims), it contained seriously false assertions like "she was alsod directly involved in the planning and execution of the Rainbow warrier", "the creation of a "Halal" government student lunch program", "promoting homosexual contacts with/among children" etc. If needed I can comment on this point by point.

Benjamin.pineau 11:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Why is there no mention made of the recent controversy regarding Royal's failure to immediately denounce or condemn statements, made by Hizbullah politician Ali Ammar, that Israel's occupation of parts of Lebanon are "Nazism" and her apparent agreement with Ammar, that US foreign policy is "unlimited insanity"? [26] Tomer^talk 01:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I almost put a {{sofixit}} template on your talk page ;). My personnal opinion is that the first incident seemed very minor (and seemed, as an outsider, to have had a very short lifespan in the medias despite the fact the UMP tried to comment as much as possible on it). For the second one I haven't heard of it so I can't say. -- lucasbfr ^talk 03:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you read the article I linked to, I think you'll see that while it appears "very minor" from a European perspective, it will do her no favors on "this side of the pond". The second incident is actually an extension of the first, and speaks even worse of her. As an aside, what is "UMP"? Tomer^talk 09:12, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The UMP is France's conservative party currently in power, president Chirac's and presidential hopeful Nicolas Sarkozy's party. The controversy was actually quite big in France for a few days but died down after the ambassador backed her version. I have however rewritten the paragraph because it was quite clumsy.Thermaland 14:26, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed:

Speculation about the power women's relationship rose in France after a newspaper said Royal had postponed a

Hillary Rodham Clinton

did not want to see her

because it seemed to me of low relevence and was uncited.--Grahamec 03:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the external link provided in the opening of the previous section. It is of "low relevance" [sic] as far as her current career is concerned, but potentially has tremendous ramifications for her national and international aspirations. That said,

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball... Tomer^talk 09:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

It was also badly written. Having read the citation, I'm disinclined to add it back, because what is convenient for Clinton now, I suspect, will have little impact on any future official relationship between them, but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball anyway.--Grahamec 11:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

She was recently featured in the Dec. 26, 2006