Talk:Gilbert du Motier, Marquis de Lafayette/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Gilbert du Motier, Marquis de Lafayette. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Assessment

No infobox-- but whether to use one should be carefully considered by the workgroups. Wikifying the references might also be helpful.

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 11:44, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightst a llion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 07:42, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Proposal :	Gilbert du Motier, Marquis de Lafayette/Archive 1 → Gilbert du Motier, marquis de La Fayette
Rationale :	Lowercasing noble rank, as with other articles on French nobility.
Proposer :	David Kernow 15:40, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Voting and discussion

Please add * Support or * Oppose followed by a brief explanation, then sign your vote using "~~~~".

Support as proposer. David Kernow 15:44, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

family? he had children -- he must have been married. Wolfman 03:26, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yes, he married Marie-Adrienne-Françoise de Noailles, daughter of Jean-Paul-François, 5e duc de Noailles. I don't have the date. --Tkinias 10:21, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Article should move to his name (Gilbert Du Motier, marquis de La Fayette), since he is not the only marquis de La Fayette in history. There's no reason, since we have redirects, to keep it where it is. It should also be spelled correctly. See the Bibliothèque nationale de France's card catalog for the correct form of the name. --Tkinias 10:28, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I think this currently follows the rule of using the most commonly used name in English. Always a tricky call when that is different than the person's actual name, but in this case the actual name is so obscure that I bet that not one English-speaker in a thousand would recognize it (in fact, I'd venture that not one French-speaker in a hundred would identify just "Gilbert Du Motier"), and there is no other famous Marquis de La Fayette. Of course, whatever we choose, all likely variants should be added as redirects. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:12, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)

I would argue that my suggestion would not violate the rule, since it is not replacing the commonly-known name with one less known, but expanding it to include his name as well as his noble title. I wouldn't suggest simply using Gilbert Du Motier, but Gilbert Du Motier, marquis de La Fayette. I also note that Britannica has him under his full name, not simply his title. --Tkinias 20:42, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

There was another famous Lafayette, as mentioned in the section Early life, who fought along side Joan of Arc. Josh-Levin@ieee.org 04:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Move

Thanks for the move, john. I think he should be under La Fayette, though, as that is the standardized spelling of the title, and is AFAICT universally used for all other members of the family. --Tkinias 09:13, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Crap damn . I was just fixing the redirects when I noticed the downcasing of Du. According to the Bibliothèque nationale de France catalogue, it's Du Motier, with a capital D (odd, I know, but I'm not going to argue with the BNF!) I can't move it there, though; the system won't do it. --Tkinias 09:34, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Britannica uses the small "d" (I checked before moving it)...I don't think it's a terribly big deal. john k 16:21, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I was taught in school that the question of whether or not do capitalize articles and prepositions that are part of personal names depends on the context. These include "du", as well, as "van", "von", "de", "la", etc. If the article or preposition is the first part of the name in its context, it is capitalized. If it is preceded by another part of the person's name, it is lower case. Hence, you might begin a sentence about a noted German-American rocket scientist with either "Von Braun" or "Werner von Braun". Very few people seem to follow this usage. Josh-Levin@ieee.org 17:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Name change

This is ridiculous. He is known universally as Marquis de Lafayette (See use common terms). [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality/^talk]] 02:09, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)

The reason for the move was to avoid ambiguity with other other holders of the title (whom I am planning on writing up), and to be in conformance with the standards set up for nobility (see Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(names_and_titles)#Other non-royal names). —Tkinias 04:25, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

But see also #6: "In general, use the most commonly recognized English-language form of the name. Create redirections or disambiguations for other plausible links." [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality/^talk]] 04:31, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

This is a case where it appears a more specific guideline conflicts with a general guideline; furthermore, #6 does not apply at all to French names—it addresses solely "Non-European and non-Western" names and titles. Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington, known almost universally as simply "the Duke of Wellington", is under his full name and title, in compliance with Wikipedia naming conventions. Similarly, the Black Prince (AFAIK the only person ever known by that nickname) is at Edward, the Black Prince. If you disagree with this, you might join the discussion on naming conventions, but on this point there seems to be something of a consensus there.

There is also a strong precedent that pages with names like Marquis de Lafayette are pages describing the title and listing its holders (see, e.g., Duc d'Orléans). —Tkinias 04:45, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I totally agree with Tkinias. I would say more, but I couldn't put it more eloquently or more simply. Let's just leave it at that. --SimpleBeep 04:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree, let's keep the full name for this page. Matthieu 17:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Freemasonry

Lafayette was a prominant Freemason in both his home country and aknowledged and respected by American Freemasons (1), I was dissapointed to find no aspect of that side of his life covered in this article. Jachin 06:06, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

All that particular citation says is that he was a Mason and was warmly greeted by his fellow Masons when he toured the U.S. in the 1820s. If someone can document that he either affected Masonry or affected the world through Masonry, or that Masonry had a particular effect on his thinking or actions, then it belongs. Otherwise, it is no more notable than a present-day figure being a member of the Masons… or the Sons of Italy, or the ACLU, or even the RIAA. Most people have many such affiliations; they should show up in the article only when significance can be demonstrated. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:27, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

I see that Category:Freemasons has now been added to the article. I will not unilaterally remove it, but consider this a request for a "second" on the suggestion of removing it. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:22, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

I think the real question is whether Category:Freemasons is a worthwhile category. I'm not precisely sure. But I think 18th century freemasonry is quite different from 20th century freemasonry. While everybody who belonged to a masonic organization in the 20th century certainly shouldn't be so categorized, being a freemason was a considerably more significant thing back in the 18th century. So I'm not sure why it's inappropriate to include Lafayette in such a category. john k 05:44, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

You are correct that the Freemasons were far more significant at that date than they are now, but I'm still not sure if it's useful to mention membership unless (as I said above) we have some evidence that the person "either affected Masonry or affected the world through Masonry, or that Masonry had a particular effect on his thinking or actions". But I'll drop the subject at this point. -- Jmabel | Talk 16:58, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Please have a look on Les Neuf Sœurs and/or, if you can read a little french, on this website and I guess you'll find such an evidence. Sincerely. --82.227.42.76 18:06, 13 January 2007 (UTC) (from french Wikipedia).

Freemasonry is a category that includes several groups and organizations in numerous nations across the planet, all of which claim descent from the original European organization. In the USA, Freemasonry has two primary groups, the Free and Accepted Masons, and the Prince Hall Masons. There are others, and even the F&AM ahnd PH Masons have Federal structures with Grand Lodges in most if not all 50 States and the Districts and Territories. The point is that Freemasonry is clearly a Category that should be inclusive, NOT exclusive. - 18:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

There is a statue of LaFayette in the French Quarter Museum (or whatever is left of it) honoring him as a Free Mason. This has to be checked since Katrina may have destroyed that building.

Uncritical biography

I find this article somewhat biased in favour of La Fayette, describing him solely as a great friend of liberty and a free press. For example, it is quite clear that La Fayette went very far to prevent Jean-Paul Marat from publishing some of his essays and also in opposing the Jacobins and the club des Cordeliers generally. The article should also reflect these actions during La Fayette's command of the Parisian police prior to the fall of the kingdom in 1792. Maybe the pre-marxist views of Marat are not well received in many quarters, but La Fayette waged a fight that violated the freedom of the press - at least in Marat's case - and he could be considered a contra-revolutionary royalist to a certain extent. All of which ended with his condemnation as a traitor for trying to uphold the monarchy against the will of the National Assembly. Sir48-Denmark

I agree, but have something to add as well; this articles reference to the Champ-de-Mars Massacre as the "supressing of a riot" is not only biased, but unfactual. The truth is this (from the French wikipedia article on the Champ-de-Mars--roughly translated):

The Cordeliers' petition of the 15th of July, 1791 was taken to the alter of the Patrie which had been raised for 14 July, 1790. A crowd assembled there to sign the petition, demanding the end of the monarchy and asking that France become a republic. The Constituent Assembly ordered them to disperse. The Mayor of Paris decreed martial law which institution was signaled by red flags. This law permitted the forces to be ordered to use their arms. La Fayette tried in vain to disperse the crowd, but Bailly gave the order to fire on the people, [which he did;] there were 50 dead and hundreds of wounded.

So, it wasn't exactly a riot, and whether following orders or not, he fired on an unarmed crowd. Whether one thinks this is excusable or not, it is a white-washing of the historical personnage not to mention such an incident. --Montagnarde1794 06:51, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

In agreement: I've rewritten this section to expand the information on constitutional monarchists like Lafayette, and I've given a summary of the "massacre of the Champ de Mars". --Linden Salter 00:08, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

The Swords or La Fayette

I have heard that when La Fayette was in the colonies that he gave out 3 decorational swords as a sign of honor. I know that he gave one to George Washington and one to Daniel Shays but I do not know who he gave the third sword to and would like to get any information on it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.67.234.72 (talk • contribs) 10 Nov 2005.

Last Words

The article states La Fayette's last words were "Je sous ve toute ou." I'm inclined to delete this as there's no citation for it and the French is gibberish. (My translation is "I under ve all or". "Ve" isn't in my Petit Robert dictionary -- is it a misspelling or an archaic word?) A google search turns up a different "last words" (http://www.trivia-library.com/a/famous-last-word-part-2.htm). Geffb 05:03, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

"Je me sousviens du toutou" ?

"Je suis venu trop tôt" ?

"Je vous dit tout de go" ?

He would have been expected to mumble, of course.

(Lunarian 18:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

I think it is: "Je vous suis tout ouïe". But yeah, it seems butchered, I'm not sure it's archaic French at all. Matthieu 17:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Geese you guys, for a bilingual like me i almost puked when i saw this. By the way "go" does not exist in french. Ouie is an expression which translates to "ouch".Fheo 23:28, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

What? "ouïe" is the hearing sense in modern french and the expression ( still used currently in french ) "je suis toute ouïe" means "My ears are wide open, I can hear what you have to say". 90.11.50.49 (talk) 14:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Clearer Opening Paragraph

The opening should have a sentence or two about his actual roles and accomplishments in the American and French Revolutions respectively so that the most important bits don't have to be laboriously culled from the more detailed paragraphs. Youdontsmellbad 22:18, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

How 'bout "What happenned to you France? You used to be cool. Take this guy for example."--Murphoid 03:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

In response to Murphoid's comments: I know you're just joking, but I don't think that type of introduction would be acceptable for an encyclopedia. Not to be rude, though, it is funny!

And yes, I agree that there should be a bit more, but not much. There is already mention, and it suggests that one should read on. Maybe that's enough, maybe it's not. Personally, I think there shouldn't be such a fuss. --SimpleBeep 04:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The "slavery" information is too vague and has some inaccuracies. For example, while the majority of the slaves who lived at Mount Vernon at the end of Washington's life belonged to the Custis estate (Martha Washington's first husband), the proportion was fairly close to half. And, Martha Washington did not free her own slaves after Washington's death. She did not own slaves in her own right; therefore, she could not have freed them. Rather, she renounced her life interest in George Washington's slaves a year after his death, which led to their being freed--according to the provisions of his will--early. It is true that both Lafayette and Washington grew to dislike the institution of slavery, though for different reasons and with different results. Washington actually pursued the idea of freeing both the he owned outright and purchasing, with the intention to free, the Custis slaves. He had a two pronged strategy. He hoped to rend his Mount Vernon lands to English farmers who would pay him rent, ensuring a continued income stream, and employ the freed slaves. In order to raise funds to purchase the Custis slaves, he hoped to sell the lands he owned in th western territories. Neither plan was successful. He found no takers to either rent the Mount Vernon farms or purchase the western land. Lafaytte, who as a Frenchman, did not own slaves in his home country, purchased a plantation in French Guyana, with its slaves, where he practiced a system of education and gradual emancipation. For more infomation on these issues, see the George Washington papers at the Library of Congress and the University of Virginia.

Is this the worst article on Wikipedia?

I hate to say this, but I have never read a Wikipedia entry in worse condition than this one. Can we get someone who is neither attached to American founder myths nor French revolution myths to redo it? 89.49.65.139 21:41, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

However after looking over my notes of this website i soon came to realize that the chronological accuracy is awful. In certain parts it states that in 1812 Lafayette helped in the French Revolution. Im sorry but im an expert on French history and the revolution took place in the 1790's. This article is a disgrace to wikipedia! Fheo 23:22, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Honorary Citizenship

When Winston Churchill was made an Honorary Citizen of the United States in 1963, I recall the news media stating that this was the first such grant "since LaFayette". I also recalled that Lafayette's honorary citizenship given him during a visit to the U.S. commemorating the 50th anniversary of Independence, and that it was special in that it carried over to all living descendants.

Lafayette was granted honorary citizenship more recently, in 2002, without any mention of his descendants.

I did a little more digging, and found a three web pages ([1], [2], [3]) the first of which states:

Demonstrating the gratitude of the American nation, Congress proclaimed Lafayette an honorary citizen in 1824 and invited him to tour the U.S. as its first official guest.

Another web site ([4]) says:

The Marquis named his son George Washignton (sic)
Lafayette. His direct descendants, members of the Chambrun family, are honorary U.S. citizens.

Well, my memory wasn't totally accurate (LaFayette left the U.S. before 1826), but it seems that it was better than that of Congress. Josh-Levin@ieee.org 17:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I have added, to the main article, his 1824 grant of Honorary Citizenship.

University

I think we should point out that there is a university called Lafayette in Easton, PA(for all you sad souls who dont know were Easton is, its near Allentown, for all you sad souls who dont know were Allentown is, get some geography lessons). The coolest town in all of PA.Fheo 23:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Early Sections

I made a bunch of edits to try to clean up the early sections, which need a lot of work. I think it's improved, but what it really needs is some substantive beefing up of the American Revolution section, which relies too much on long quotations and doesn't give enough detail of what he actually did in America. Feel free.

--Eldred 15:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Masons

However, as Washington's letters show, by the end of the war, since some of the worst traitors like Benedict Arnold were masons, focus turned to the proven loyal in his Society of the Cincinnati, of which one of the biggest Chapters was in France.

Besides being terribly written & uncited, I can't see why this belongs in an article on La Fayette. I haven't been involved in this article lately, so I'm hesitant to delete unilaterally, but I'd welcome deletion by someone who has been active in it. - Jmabel | Talk 05:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Tradition has it that, with General Washington's sponsorship[citation needed], Lafayette had been raised as a Master Mason in 1777 or 1778 shortly after his arrival in America.

We already know the masons are a powerfull, influential and sometimes charitable organization. Please cite this statement, above, using primary sources. NO popular-opinion-sophistry, hear-say or tradition please!
Also, nowhere on General Lafayette's birth certificate, grave stone or anywhere in his signed letters do we find Lafayette's name written as 2 words. (i.e. as in "La Fayette")
What does this say about some modern historians who continue to revise his name in this way?
--4.156.117.22 20:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I would never apply one of those lazy and vulgar "cleanup" notices, but a beginning might be made here by fixing errors of bolding and italics, by dropping the genealogy of Lafayette's descendents to the bottom, and cleaning it of genealogy-hobbyist jargon. --Wetman (talk) 08:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Did he draft the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen?

Just curious, this link http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-DeclarRMNC.html seems to say that Emmanuel Sieyès drafted it, as well as this wikipedia entry for Sieyes. -Maimone (talk) 03:08, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Usage of the title "Marquis"

I've recently been involved in a discussion (here) with a user who suggests that referring to Lafayette as "Marquis de Lafayette" amounts to a slur and is something to be avoided assiduously. The basis for this is Lafayette's renunciation of his title in 1790, and the fact that detractors subsequently belabored the title to try to harm him. I see no evidence at all that usage of the title in modern times is anything other than an acknowledgment of fact, but I just wanted to give others a chance to comment. Thanks! Huwmanbeing ☀★ 10:24, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you. The title might have been used at the time in a negative fashion, but from our perspective now, he was at one time the "Marquis de Lafayette", and I don't see how the use of the title now has any negative impact on the person, especially when (in the article) the situation is explained. Former presidents of the United States retain the title "Mr. President" even though they no longer fill that role; granted, I don't know of any that have renounced that title, but we now refer to past presidents that have passed away as "presidents", even though they were not presidents throughout their whole lives, and in most cases were not active in that role when they died. Omnedon (talk) 13:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

No American Lafayette scholar (who wishes to keep his reputation) would make this "LA FAYETTE" error (or use "Marquis" in present tense or post-1790 usage, since General Lafayette was the principle author of the vote in which the aristocracy was abolished in France and that remains abolished today).

These errors stem from original (British)Encyclopedia Britannica (SEE the perfect paper trail in old editions through current edition available in google-books) and post Restoration French Press in the early 19th century that started that fraud. Wikipedia rules are very specific about known sources of fraud especially when they are designed to deceive.

It seems those old British Empire and French editors were quite upset about Lafayette's leadership in the abolishment of the French aristocracy/nobility in 1790 and many paybacks ensued from those aristocrat editors that continue through to this day.

ALSO NOTE:

--From his birth certificate, through all his written letters and his grave stone all contain one word; LAFAYETTE.

--Americans for over 100 years(including many decades after Lafayette's death) knew to ignore the old Ency. Britannica and old British and aristocratic-French Press frauds. Many US towns were named LAFAYETTE (all 1 word) during these years when Americans knew about these British and post-Restoration French frauds on Lafayette's name. SEE E.E.Brandon, General Lafayette, 4 Vols. who documented the American Press and found >90% knew about the fraud and it was nearly wiped out in U.S.

--So called historians that throw those "MARQUIS" "LA FAYETTE" titles around (in present tense usage and in post 1790 references) is one great way to spot the "not so thorough" phony historians.
Calling Lafayette "Marquis" (in post 1790 usage) is like calling a former slave from Georgia, after Lincoln's Abolition of Slavery, still a slave.

Name spelling issues

The article is called "Gilbert du Motier, marquis de La Fayette".

The text opens with "Marie-Joseph-Paul-Yves-Roch-Gilbert-DuMotier Lafayette".

He's called Lafayette throughout. Is this because when he renounced his La Fayette title, he adopted the one-word surname Lafayette?
"du Motier" seems to have been his personal surname at birth, but it looks like it became part of his 7-barrel given name. Is this correct? Or should the opening para start with "Marie-Joseph-Paul-Yves-Roch-Gilbert DuMotier Lafayette"? -- JackofOz (talk) 14:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

The naming issue is explained in the article under the heading Name and family. Over the last three years the article has been moved once in each direction, from La F to Laf and back again. Since the article pays proper attention to both names that are still in actual use, I suggest we leave it the way it is. In my opinion, it is more important that we track how people refer to him in print than to obey all of his wishes. EdJohnston (talk) 02:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation help

I am in contact with a professional voice actor who is trying to record a spoken version of George Washington and he wants to hear someone pronounce "Marquis de La Fayette". If anyone would be willing to call him up or even leave a voice mail with the proper pronunciation, please email me and I will send you his contact info. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 18:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The Wife

I wish I knew more about her, because the beginning of the article suggests she had a lot to do with his safety and well being. But I can't find a link to her page. Does she even have one? If she does it is not easily found on this page the way it should be. Someone, please answer the call! Sixer Fixer (talk) 19:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Descendents

I just cut this from the article, for the time being, in a more streamlined form. Lazulilasher (talk) 19:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Here it is: Children:

Henriette (1775-1775)
George Washington Lafayette (1779–1849), whose godfather^{[citation needed]} was Lafayette's close friend George Washington; like his father, George permanently disavowed the title^[1] and served only in the lower House of the National Assembly. He married in 1802 Françoise Emilie Destutt de Tracy, and they had two sons and three daughters including:
2. Oscar Gilbert Lafayette (1815–1881), liberal politician.
3. Edmond Lafayette, (1818-1891)
Anastasie Lafayette (1 July, 1777-1863), who married Charles Fay de LaTour-Maubourg (1774-1824), the youngest of the three LaTour-Maubourg brothers. (His eldest brother César (1756-1831) was a French general, one of Lafayette's closest, loyal friends and who was imprisoned, in isolation, the same as Lafayette, and is buried at the head of Lafayette's grave at Picpus/Paris.). They had a daughter:
1. Jenny Fay de LaTour-Maubourg (6 September 1812 La Grange-Bleneau-15 April 1897 Turin) ^[2], who was matrilineal ancestress (great-great-grandmother) of Belgium's Queen Paola.
Virginie (1782-1849), who married Louis de Lasteyrie du Saillant (1781-1826) (who permanently disavowed the aristocratic "Marquis" title^[1] and had descendants surviving until date.) They had several children including two daughters listed here, one of whom was ancestress of the Pineton de Chambrun family. Another son was Jules, Marquis de Lasteyrie (1810-1884)

Naming

I'm not proposing a move (just want to make that clear before I'm yelled at ;)).

Articles need to be consistent - and this article is no exception. If the spelling in the title is La Fayette, then he should be referred to as La Fayette throughout the entire article (as opposed to what we have now, where he is referred to as both).--daniel folsom 20:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

This is a tough cookie. His name was La Fayette, but at least in the US he is known as Lafayette. I agree with the above, we should use La Fayette because it is the correct spelling of his name, and he is not only well-known in the United States but in France as well. But, as I come from the US, I must admit that it is rather disingenuous to see the name spelled "La Fayette" (as here in New York I find myself frequently debarking the subway at the Broadway-Lafayette station and the town next to mine where I grew up was Lafayette) Lazulilasher (talk) 01:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

So, I just went to the library to get some reference material which will hopefully help us: Adopted Son: Washington, Lafayette, and the Friendship that Saved the Revolution, For Liberty and Glory: Washington, Lafayette, and their revolutions, and Lafayette in Two Worls: Public Cultures & Personal Identities in an age of Revolutions. Notably, the spelling is always "Lafayette", again I am in the U.S. So, I am rather confounded about the way to progress regarding the spelling of the subject's name. Any other suggestions? Lazulilasher (talk) 18:11, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it's simply disputed - I'm also from the U.S. and I'm used to Lafayette, however I'm not saying it should be Lafayette OR La Fayette - I'm simply saying that we need to be consistent. If it's La Fayette in the title, it should be La Fayette throughout the entire article; if it's Lafayette in the title, it should be Lafayette throughout the entire article.--daniel folsom 19:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'm going to go with La Fayette now as that seems to be the English manner of spelling Monsieur La Fayette's name. We can change it back, later if we decide that that is the case. Honestly, I don't know the correct answer. Lazulilasher (talk) 23:35, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

A spelling change would need consensus

With this edit, User:Lazulilasher changed a bunch of occurrences of La Fayette's name to the American spelling, Lafayette. I urge him to revert this change. The spelling of his name has been discussed many times over the past year, and the current spelling is (I believe) supported by consensus. Americans are more used to seeing 'Lafayette' while in England and France, the spelling 'La Fayette' is more common. I suggest that the original spelling, still captured in the current name of the article, should be kept. 00:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

That's fine, I'll change it back. Give me a moment to finish the edit I'm working on presently and then I'll replace Lafayette with La Fayette. I wasn't sure (see the conversation above), so I merely chose one and went with it for consistency. It's a simple matter to change, I'll just load it up into Word and replace all instances with La Fayette. I personally am torn on the matter, as all published material I have says "Lafayette", on the other hand the French spelling is "Lafayette" -- so I really did not know which to use. My apologies. Wait a few moments and I'll put it back...Lazulilasher (talk) 00:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, it's done. They should be all La Fayette's now. I really don't have an opinion on the matter, as long as it is consistent, although if one could find a definitive source, that would be great. Regardless, it is a fairly simple matter to change. :) Lazulilasher (talk) 00:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Spotlight Todo

Put {{fact}} tags where needed
- Subsequently cite everything
Split up the French Revolution section into more subsections
Clean up Legacy section

GA Criteria

A good article is:

Well-written:
1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
Verifiable with no original research:
1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
2. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
3. it contains no original research; and
4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
Broad in its coverage:
1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Issues

Per Wikipedia:LEAD#Length our lead section is too short
Questionable whether OR is used in the Name and family section and the Legacy section
- Both section should have more citations
Images need to be checked (all images must have "copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content)"

Citations linked to page numbers

Here are the page numbers used for the citations I added this weekend, so we can link the cite directly to a page in the source text: Adopted (Clark):

Hate the English, page 13

Schooling, marriage, page 17

Rank of captain, page 20

Raynal, rights of man, 28

De Kalb/de Broglie/decision to travel to America 75

Great Conversation 100

Washington’s recommendation

Sword presentation=243

Departure for America=257

Yorktown=330-338

Liberty & Glory=

Ancestors in war 33

Brandywine= 75

Richmond defence=153

Drive through Virginia=155

Here to learn 70

Battle of Barren Hill 112

Holbrook:

Lafayette: Man in the middle

Silas Deane=15

Commission=19

Retreat=23

Albany=26

Barren Hill=28, 29

Return to Boston=33

Return to France=33

Lobbying, house arrest=39

Tasklist

Hey guys, it looks like we're making some great progress on the article. So, to keep the momentum going, here are a few things that we can continue to ameliorate:

Add page-numbers from Holbrook's book Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:28, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
~~Finish formatting all refs with {{cite}} templates and move those templates to the Works Cited section.~~
Expand the lead - down to: "it'll need expanded about the french revolution, his time in prison, etc...".
~~fact check and verify all sources for the French Revolution are reliable~~ Done by Lazulilasher
Clean up Legacy section, consider removing parts, and verifying all claims to a reliable source. Lots of it does not have sources at all. (in progress by Jamie)
Make "Later Years" more concise and again, verify all sources are reliable. Later Years and Legacy need a thorough scrubbing. Make sure sentence flow is logical and we follow WP:SUMMARY by not delving into too much detail.
~~Consider integrating "Etymology" section (which isn't an etymology) into Early life, somehow. Much of this has been done.~~
Copy edit for grammar and copy edit for style, verify thematic elements link paragraphs and that all sentences logically lead to the next
~~Examine and consider relevance of citation numbers 3,4,5,38,39,42,43~~
Perhaps, create a section detailing La Fayette's relationship with Washington.
~~Add {{persondata}} template~~ done as far as we can. ~~We need a death location~~. —— nixeagle 19:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
reduce the number of sections by merging them.
~~Shorten image captions~~
~~Remove and cite all {{fact}} tags.~~
Cite 12 needs to be fixed with the correct format. - Also note that this ref only cites the year, not the date as the article has. So... we need a ref with a date.

Cite 12 needs to be fixed with the correct format. (fyi miranda, you can do this simple task :), needless to say I'll put it in the tasklist abovfe )
- Miranda, for future work, please be more specific when saying "fix to correct format" or just do it yourself. Even better, if you are not sure how to do it, just mention it on IRC. Cheers! —— nixeagle 03:37, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
For reading purposes the References should be split into a differento section (contain.ing books) and a citations section (author, book, page number). miranda 20:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- You need to explain what is wrong with the current format, perhaps someone else will understand. I think what we have now is acceptable. —— nixeagle 03:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Legacy section is listy. (we know).
In a section "Virginia and Yorktown", please clarify: "On the 28th, the men neared Yorktown and began preparations for the siege" to say which men were effected. miranda 21:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- As we were talking about washington in the prior sentence, its not quite obvoius, but it is clear that the men are the US. (under command of general washington). I'll clarify that in the article —— nixeagle 03:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  - Bah in context the men obviously refers to the french and the english. —— nixeagle 03:27, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
    - Crud I can't remember. Its worded so "men" refers to the french and the english, but it could be the british. (I thought the british were the ones besieged there). —— nixeagle 03:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Long term questions

Should there be ant forks for this article? (as in see main article:<insert one here>. (asked by Synergy on IRC) `
- Some were put in last night for the french revolution section, other sections should probably have them as well. —— nixeagle 15:58, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Date formats

La Fayette was a Frenchman, France uses International Dating format (day-month- year), so please don't change dates to American Dating format. Most of the dates are in d-m-y format and always have been. I went through and corrected them all some months ago, but it seems that I have to keep a close and continuing eye on it. --Pete (talk) 22:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

We will be moving everything to the correct date format in a bit. I'm not too concerned about date format at this point, we are working on other issues that the article has. Our goal is to get the article to a GA or an FA status. To do so, I'm sure we will have to have the correct date format. Please don't mind us if we get a few wrong while working on other issues. —— nixeagle 23:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Just to give you an idea of the commitment we have to getting this article to GA or FA status... during the time spotlight has worked (some 3 days now) 306 constructive (no vandalism reverts) edits have been made to the article: A link to the diff is at http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Gilbert_du_Motier%2C_marquis_de_La_Fayette&diff=231326599&oldid=230600988 —— nixeagle 23:34, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

One final note, I'd suggest you continue to keep an eye on the date stuff during the duration of the time we are working on the article. Nobody in spotlight is intentionally changing the dates around, just it is not on the top of everyone's mind. When we get done with the tasks we listed above, folks involved will take the time to check all the minor details. —— nixeagle 23:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Gah! I keep thinking of things, could you do me a favor and link me to the guideline/policy on the dates. I know there is one in the manual of style but its not something I have taken the time to investigate. As you seem to know which format is which and what its supposed to be, I'm assuming you know which part of that style guideline is relevant. Much appreciated! —— nixeagle 23:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:DATE#Full_date_formatting has the relevant policy. Wikidating - making dates into links so that the editor preference autoformatting kicks in - has recently become optional, so I'm removing the linking from dates when I modify them into the appropriate format. This article is one where either date format is appropriate, because while La Fayette is/was a Frenchman, and France uses d-m-y format, he also has significant ties to the U.S., where the reverse applies. However, as the article was predominantly d-m-y, I changed m-d-y to International Dating format for consistency, in the process removing the wikilinks. This has had the paradoxical effect of making these dates appear inconsistent to those editors who have date preferences enabled in the American Dating format. --Pete (talk) 00:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Alright. Works fine for me, I don't think anyone will be changing it to the other format. At least not without a proper discussion here. However I will note that at points of opportunity (when I'm copy editing sections) I have taken the habit of adding in the wikilinked dates. Please remember that most of this is fairly minor, considering that a complete overhaul of the article is in progress. —— nixeagle 13:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I've been making a concerted effort to use the International format whenever I add new information. Just an odd note: I consider myself reasonably intelligent, but for some reason, the Date thing just completely confuses me. I have no idea why--it just blows my mind. Hence, if I were to add a date in the wrong section, will rectify it as soon as I see the error. Lazulilasher (talk) 13:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Updated Task List

Now that our project has progressed, Nixeagle has suggested we have a new tasklist.

Pursuant to that request, I am pleased to present WP:SPOT tasklist v.2. Please note that a number of these tasks may seem mundane, but their completion will certainly help us reach our goal.

~~Update Lead with more information about the French Revolution.~~

Thanks to dudman for work here. —— nixeagle 22:16, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

~~Verify that all non-book (i.e. URL citations) are 1.) Reliable, per WP:RELIABLE and 2.) Verify the information cited in the article. This will be one of the more thankless tasks, but it is essential.~~
~~Verify that all dates are accurate. Again, this is is an important task--dates must be accurate.~~
Merge/Copyedit/Evaluate Legacy and Later Life section. Is it presented in the most appropriate manner? I notice a one sentence paragraph, could we incorporate that better into the text?
Read and re-read article with an unbiased, objective viewpoint with an eye towards verifying article is NPOV and that explanations exist for those who are introduced to the topic for the first time (example: Dendodge caught that we did not directly assert which branch of the military Noailles was a captain of)

I think that's got it. Yours humbly, Lazulilasher (talk) 19:47, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

New Lead?

This was the Lead in former times. I find it pretty good and am in favor of including it in our Lead

Lafayette served in the American Revolutionary War both as a general and as a diplomat, serving entirely without pay in both roles. Later, he was to prove a key figure in the early phases of the French Revolution, serving in the Estates General and the subsequent National Constituent Assembly. He was a leading figure among the Feuillants, who tried to turn France into a constitutional monarchy, and commander of the French National Guard. Accused by Jean-Paul Marat of responsibility for the "Massacre of the Champ de Mars" (before which, Lafayette was nearly assassinated), he subsequently was forced out of a leading role in the Revolution by Jacobin Terror anarchists. On 19 August 1792, the Jacobin party seized control of Paris and the National Assembly, ordering Lafayette's arrest. He fled France and was arrested by the Austrian army in Rochefort, Belgium. Thereafter, he spent five years in various Austrian and Prussian prisons. He was released in 1797; however, Napoleon Bonaparte would not allow his return to France for several years. He continued to be active in French and European politics until his death in 1834. Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 21:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Book citations without page numbers

User:Lazulilasher there are multiple citations from your books that don't have their relevant page number. Please add these page numbers if u can. There are also Citations tagged with Payan, who is unknown. Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 22:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Blackjack

Surprised to see no mention of the wonderful line that marked the arrival of American troops in France: After departing from Fort Jay at Governors Island in New York Harbor under top secrecy in May 1917, Pershing arrived in France in June 1917. In a show of American presence, part of the 16th Infantry Regiment, lacking polish and discipline, but demonstrating much enthusiasm marched through Paris shortly after his arrival. Pausing at Lafayette's tomb he was reputed to have said the famous line "Lafayette, we are here." The morale-boosting sound bite was in fact spoken by his aide, Colonel Charles E. Stanton.^[3] Token American forces were deployed in France in the fall of 1917, with an enormous tonic effect on Allied morale. I realise that this occurred many years after La Fayette's death, but to many readers, it will be the reason they turned to the article. --Pete (talk) 01:46, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

We could mention that in his legacy/Death section perhaps? If you would like to talk/work with us, please click this link: http://embed.mibbit.com/?server=irc.freenode.net&channel=%23wikipedia-spotlight&noServerTab=false —— nixeagle 01:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

LAFAYETTE and the "MARQUIS" "LA FAYETTE" FRAUDS in old British Empire and French Press

Hey everyone I received this message as an explanation of why we should use Lafayette:

No American Lafayette scholar (who wishes to keep his reputation) would make this "LA FAYETTE" error (or use "Marquis" in present tense or post-1790 usage, since General Lafayette was the principle author of the vote in which the aristocracy was abolished in France and that remains abolished today).

These errors stem from original (British)Encyclopedia Britannica (SEE the perfect paper trail in old editions through current edition available in google-books) and post Restoration French Press in the early 19th century that started that fraud. Wikipedia rules are very specific about known sources of fraud especially when they are designed to deceive.

It seems those old British Empire and French editors were quite upset about Lafayette's leadership in the abolishment of the French aristocracy/nobility in 1790 and many paybacks ensued from those aristocrat editors that continue through to this day.

ALSO NOTE:

--From his birth certificate, through all his written letters and his grave stone all contain one word; LAFAYETTE.

--Americans for over 100 years(including many decades after Lafayette's death) knew to ignore the old Ency. Britannica and old British and aristocratic-French Press frauds. Many US towns were named LAFAYETTE (all 1 word) during these years when Americans knew about these British and post-Restoration French frauds on Lafayette's name. SEE E.E.Brandon, General Lafayette, 4 Vols. who documented the American Press and found >90% knew about the fraud and it was nearly wiped out in U.S.

--So called historians that throw those "MARQUIS" "LA FAYETTE" titles around (in present tense usage and in post 1790 references) is one great way to spot the "not so thorough" phony historians.
Calling Lafayette "Marquis" (in post 1790 usage) is like calling a former slave from Georgia, after Lincoln's Abolition of Slavery, still a slave.

GA Review

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Gilbert du Motier, marquis de La Fayette/GA1. Please do not edit the review page.

GA first impressions.

I am quite happy to look at the article, but this will not be for a day or so. One thing though on first impressions it looked an easy GA review, well referenced etc; But things like

...subsequently after on (which is it) 24 April his grandfather ... in Ancestry and
...After a thirty-two day journey, (he?) waited four days for the Continental Congress to declare, on 31 July 1777, "that his services be accepted and that,... in American Revolution.
These are two examples of an article that needs a slow read through, (hopefully after a rest with the amount of editing the spotlight has done prior to nomination). An idea might be to print out a version and sit and read it. I do not want the first review to be lots of ...I don't understand what you mean by X Y or Z. Hope everybody is fine about this. Thanks. Edmund Patrick – confer 20:54, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

GA first review

General things that need looking at in no particular order.

Second Departure from France ... reference (18), refused entry to the website.
...The king "officially" forbade his leaving after British spies discovered his plan...should be referenced and does that mean that he "unofficially" did not forbid his leaving?
...The ship's captain carried $8,000 (€5,446.96)... is this the amount then or respective amount today. It needs to be made clear and also the same done to

...Ancestry... income of 25,000 livres. Augmented upon the death of an uncle, thirteen year old Lafayette was left with a yearly sum of 120,000 livres... have a look at [11] it might assist.

...Following pursuit by two British ships...should be referenced.
Brandywine and Albany
...After two months of repair, Lafayette ... is a strange way of saying it. Do you mean he recuperated / rested / "got better".
Virginia and Yorktown
...crossed paths and effected a juncture of their units.... I am not sure what this means?
...Cornwallis surrendered on 19 October 1781 under a combined volley... a combined volley of what?
After the Revolution
...Virginie... is this spelt correctly?
National Guard
...Lafayette then took the queen onto the balcony to confront the crowd,... how? why? what did she actually do? was he 'saying here is the WQueen under arrest@ or was he allowing her to shout at the crowd?
..After suppressing a riot in April 1791 he resigned his commission and was compelled to retain it... After suppressing a riot in April 1791 he resigned his commission but was compelled to retain it reads better.
Conflict and imprisonment
...Lafayette knew this meant his beheading, so he sought asylum in the United States. This did not happen, and on 19 August, ...this needs referencing, an important statement why was he refused asylum?
Later life and death
...Due to her malady, worsened by the scurvy she fell sick with in prison, ... would I think read better as ...Due to her malady, worsened by the scurvy she contracted in prison, ...
...Lafayette's final passage through New York en route before returning home to France on the frigate USS... to ...Lafayette's final passage through New York en route home to France on the frigate USS...

Questions?

Is it Marquis or marquis, the Marquis article has upper case / title, occasionally in the article it is uppercase and sometimes not. If there is a reason a note / refererence or even mention in text would be good if not it must be consistant. Same with duchesse d'Ayen in Education and marriage; have a look at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(capital_letters)#Titles

a long list I know but much of it is superficial English usage. An excellent article I learnt from it, what more can one say. Edmund Patrick – confer 18:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Spotlight checklist

Even though spotlight's not officially working on this article any more - we're still watching it :)--daniel folsom 18:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Second Departure from France
~~reference (18), refused entry to the website.~~
- Found on the web archive [12]--daniel folsom 18:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
...The king "officially" forbade his leaving after British spies discovered his plan...should be referenced and does that mean that he "unofficially" did not forbid his leaving?
- YReferenced and reworded a bit. ~~It's a bit debateable~~. The king did, officially, recall Lafayette back to his unit. And he was threatened with arrest by the Bordeaux commandant. This has been clarified and recast. Lazulilasher (talk) 03:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
...The ship's captain carried $8,000 (€5,446.96)... is this the amount then or respective amount today. It needs to be made clear and also the same done to

...Ancestry... income of 25,000 livres. Augmented upon the death of an uncle, thirteen year old Lafayette was left with a yearly sum of 120,000 livres... have a look at [13] it might assist.

- YThe 25,000 livres is 18th century terms. However, the $8,000 (referenced to Holbrook) is not clarified. I assume it's in 18th century terms, however I cannot be certain. Therefore, I recast the sentence to: The ship's captain intended to stop in the West Indies to sell cargo he had carried, however Lafayette, fearful of arrest, bought the cargo to avoid the islands. Let me know if this is sufficient. Lazulilasher (talk) 02:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
...Following pursuit by two British ships...should be referenced.
- {[y}}This was cut. I looked in 3 books and couldn't cite it, so it's been removed. Lazulilasher (talk) 02:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Brandywine and Albany
...~~After two months of repair, Lafayette ... is a strange way of saying it. Do you mean he recuperated / rested / "got better".~~
- Changed to "rest" [14] --daniel folsom 18:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Virginia and Yorktown
...~~crossed paths and effected a juncture of their units.... I am not sure what this means?~~
- It meant they combined forces–reworded anyways [15]--daniel folsom 18:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
...Cornwallis surrendered on 19 October 1781 under a combined volley... a combined volley of what?
- Y Artillery :) Lazulilasher (talk) 02:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
After the Revolution
...Virginie... is this spelt correctly?
- Yes :) But, I'll double check later. Lazulilasher (talk) 18:41, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  - YAnd, verified....daughter's full name: Marie-Antoinette Virginie, although she was known commonly as Virginie. Added full name in interest of keeping it NPOV. Lazulilasher (talk) 02:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
National Guard
...Lafayette then took the queen onto the balcony to confront the crowd,... how? why? what did she actually do? was he 'saying here is the WQueen under arrest@ or was he allowing her to shout at the crowd?
- Y Recast and added: The agreement appeared reasonable until Louis XVI declined to ratify the Declaration of Rights. On 5 October Parisian crowds found bakeries empty throughout the city. In response to both events, a mob moved to Versailles to demand flour from the royal family and their relocation to Paris. Lafayette awoke the King and replaced his guards with National Guardsmen whom were later shot by the mob. In an effort to quiet the crowd, Lafayette took the queen onto the Palace's balcony, "kissed her hand", and made a plea for order. Lafayette then convinced the royal family to relocate to the Tuileries Palace in Paris. Let me know how that sounds to you Lazulilasher (talk) 03:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
..After suppressing a riot in April 1791 he resigned his commission and was compelled to retain it... After suppressing a riot in April 1791 he resigned his commission but was compelled to retain it reads better.
- Reworded [16]--daniel folsom 18:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Gilbert_du_Motier,_marquis_de_La_Fayette&diff=233379806&oldid=233379581
Conflict and imprisonment
...Lafayette knew this meant his beheading, so he sought asylum in the United States. This did not happen, and on 19 August, ...this needs referencing, an important statement why was he refused asylum?
- Y Thanks for pointing this out. The wording was vague. What happened was that Lafayette had realized he would be beheaded, so he struck out for England in order to seek asylum in the US. This does not happen, as he was captured by the Austrians and put in prison. I clarified the requisite paragraph. Lazulilasher (talk) 03:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Later life and death

*...Due to her malady, worsened by the scurvy she fell sick with in prison, ... would I think read better as ...Due to her malady, worsened by the scurvy she contracted in prison, ...

*...Lafayette's final passage through New York en route before returning home to France on the frigate USS... to ...Lafayette's final passage through New York en route home to France on the frigate USS... Done Mm 40 (talk | contribs) 21:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC) Questions?

Is it Marquis or marquis, the Marquis article has upper case / title, occasionally in the article it is uppercase and sometimes not. If there is a reason a note / refererence or even mention in text would be good if not it must be consistant. Same with duchesse d'Ayen in Education and marriage; have a look at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(capital_letters)#Titles
- YWell, it can be either. This article used the French spellings, which can be either capitilized or not. Since the name of the page was lowercase, I changed them all to lowercase for consistency (I think I got them all :) ). See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(France_&_French-related)#Noble_titles. Let me know if you see anymore and I can change them up! Lazulilasher (talk) 03:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the thorough review! Lazulilasher (talk) 03:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

GA second review

National Guard
...Lafayette awoke the King and replaced his guards with National Guardsmen who were later shot by the mob. In an effort to quiet the crowd... who was shot the King's guards or the National Guards, please rephrase to make clear.
- I just clarified this. Lafayette implored the King to allow his royal bodyguards to be replaced. Most of them were replaced, but the ones that remained were executed by the crowd. I cited this directly to a page, as well. Lazulilasher (talk) 17:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Conflict and imprisonment
...Marat and the Committee of Surveillance constructed a guillotine at the Place du Carrousel, and throughout September approximately 1,400 people were executed... this sentence is in to do what? It acn stay but I am not sure why it is there, to paint a picture of the changes within France at the time, if so phrase it so that it says that.
- Well, my aim was to demonstrate that the atmosphere in Paris was becoming more and more murderous as the country began its descent into the Reign of Terror. Hence, this explains Lafayette's knowledge that he would likely be executed upon return to Paris. I rephrased it, please let me know how you think it reads. Lazulilasher (talk) 17:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Conflict and imprisonment
...Presently, many wives of Jacobin's enemies were divorcing their husbands... reference please
- I couldn't find a ref, so I'll bring it up in channel. If no one can, we'll remove it. Mm 40 (talk | contribs) 11:25, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
  - It is citable to Adopted Son, page 413. Many wives of the enemies of state (including moderates, like Lafayette) were divorcing their husbands to escape the guillotine's blade.... Lazulilasher (talk) 17:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Can someone please read through the whole thing, every so often the "used English" is a bit odd, hopefully I have found most of them. I have to say although there is a feel of a "bit if a rtush" this article has improved through the care of spotlight. Well done. Edmund Patrick – confer 20:02, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I'm tired now, but will look at these tomorrow. Cheers, Lazulilasher (talk) 03:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I think we got it. I'm going to read over it once more for copy edits, then I'll contact you on your talk page. Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 17:40, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

GA third review

Dear Spotlight. I was going to pass the article after another read through. Can you check the changes I have made, in case I have changed the intended meanings. After that I will pass it ... hopefully.

National Guard
Lafayette proposed plans to have a demanding schedule for the soldiers of the National Guard to police the Commune of Paris.... I have added the word to police, does this give the meaning you wished?
Later life
... including personal problems and the need to work for liberty in France... does this give the meaning you wished?

I have changed it to "the desire to work". Mm 40 (talk | contribs) 12:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

... who revoked the post after Lafayette once again called for the abolition of slavery... does this give the meaning you wished? Edmund Patrick – confer 15:11, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

They all seem ok to me. Mm 40 (talk | contribs) 12:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Second opinion

The article needs a simple copy edit. Otherwise it seems fine. Examples from the lead:

While serving in the Revolutionary War, he was wounded at the Battle of Brandywine and organized a successful retreat. - how are these two event connected, since an "and" connects them?
an augmented French commitment to the war. - why not a simpler "increased French commitment"? Augmented is not a very common word and it is used again in the discussion of his income so it stands out.
He would serve as Vice President - unnecessary word: He served as Vice President.
Upon his return, he blocked Cornwallis' troops at Yorktown, while the combined armies of Washington and Rochambeau arrived. - I know what is meant here, I think. The combined armies arrived as reinforcement and together they won?
During the Revolution, Lafayette attempted to control order - I do not know what this means.

Other examples in the article are some run-on sentences and more uses of unnecessary words like "would".
Augmented upon the death of an uncle, the thirteen year old Lafayette - was Lafayette augmented or was his income augmented?
Why is this in quotes: "as if by accident"
Lafayette felt that he would not be needed in Napoleon's government, thus he left Paris. - should be semicolon
They both exchanged gifts - They exchanged gifts
he received, perhaps, more commemoration and admiration there than any other foreign visitor in American history. - why the "perhaps" - did he or not? Maybe one of the most commenorated (misspelled) and admired - do you have a citation for that?
Also, no ALL CAPS in the reference citation.
Not sure why Time Magazine is in the Works cited. No author is given and I don't see the citation. If it is cited, it could just be cited directly.

Hope this helps, —Mattisse (Talk) 15:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I will take a look at these later this evening when I return home. Thanks for taking a look. Lazulilasher (talk) 16:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The above examples were samples from the lead only. The whole article needs a copy edit for similar problems with the prose.

—Mattisse (Talk) 16:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Okie doke, will work on it over the next few days, and see if I'm able to corral an old copy-editing friend of mine to come around, also :) Lazulilasher (talk) 15:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Final

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

great, a wonderful article which spotlight and others have improved immensely.

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
I have learnt from this article. Thanks it was a joy. Well done a GA Pass. Edmund Patrick – confer 18:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Monroe's intervention

The article states that Monroe intervened to the French Directory for the release of Adrienne, Lafayette's wife. This must be incorrect. Adrienne was released, according to the article, in January 1795, while the Directory started on November 2, 1795 when the the French Terror and no American intervention was necessary to ensure her release.Afil (talk) 04:15, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, let me check on this. I'm not at home, so I've got no books with me, but I will be later--I'll do some clarification :) Lazulilasher (talk) 16:24, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Update: Although many political prisoner/aristocrats/emigres were released at the Terror's end, Adrienne was not. Monroe did intervene on her behalf (replacing Morris, who had previously intervened). My sources say that Monroe intervened with the "5 man directory". What is going on here? Hmm... Lazulilasher (talk) 15:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I have it confirmed in a second source that Adrienne was not freed until Monroe's intervention. Lazulilasher (talk) 01:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

See French Directory. (Morris had been dismissed from France much earlier. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:47, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Copyeditor's thoughts

I think most of the things mentioned by User:Mattisse have been fixed as well as a large number of other similar things. Trying not to distort the content, I did a lot of prose tightening as well as low-level, nit-picky stuff. Another copyedit by a fresh set of eyes wouldn't hurt. The list of works cited should be re-arranged alphabetically by author's last name. I, too, wonder why Time magazine is in this list. I hope this helps. Finetooth (talk) 03:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Uh, I put the Time down there...I'm not sure why. I do recall a small voice in my head telling me not to do it. Ok, I'll take it off...Lazulilasher (talk) 00:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, it's alphabetized. Btw, nice to be working with you again, Finetooth! Lazulilasher (talk) 01:35, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Second opinion

I agree that the prose problems have been remedied by the copy editing. The prose now is very good, certainly good enough for GA. I have only two questions:

What does "Lafayette awoke the king" mean?
Why, under Legacy, is there nothing about Lafayette's accomplishments in France?

Certainly passes GA, in my opinion. —Mattisse (Talk) 16:40, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Lafayette literally awoke the sleeping king. The crowd outside was becoming agitated, calling for his head, etc. Lafayette, a moderate, woke the king and queen and took the queen onto the balcony in order to placate the crowd, and then the entire group moved from Versailles to Paris. I think, if I could be present at a moment in history, I might have chosen to be on the balcony in the middle of the night with Lafayette and Marie Antoinette.

Also, thanks so much for the excellent review (we got two!) It's so helpful when a solid review, with points for improvement, is given. Lazulilasher (talk) 17:39, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Mason section

Today I reverted text added by an editor pertaining to Lafayette's involvement in the Freemasons. It was entirely unsourced, and appear to be give undue weight to the subject's affiliation.

Here is the removed text:

Lafayette the Mason

The Marquis De Lafayette, like Washington, was a Freemason. On the occasion of his visit to Troy N.Y., a deputation from Apollo Lodge No. 13, consisting of Leland Howard, Samuel Pitcher, and Adna Treat, together with several other brethren, waited upon him and invited him to visit Apollo Lodge. The invitation was accepted, the Lodge through its committees made preparations for the reception of the distinguished visitor; and although the time was short, the preparations were creditable to the brethren.
The arch under which he was received bore the inscription "Welcome Lafayette". The lettering on the arch was done by Brother Ebenezer Prescott. On the 12th day of June, 1825, the Marquis de Lafayette became the guest of Apollo Lodge, and was received with all the honors due to his distinguished character. He was received on the "level" as all true brothers are, and after kindly shaking the hand of every brother present, accompanied with many pertinent and happy remarks, the Lodge commenced its labors and all spent a pleasant meeting until the Master announced the Lodge closed "on the square". After refreshments, as one present on the memorable occasion relates, the members tarried still to take a parting shake of the hand, or even to take a parting look at him they so highly honored, not only as a Mason, but as a patriot and hero.
The arch under which Lafayette was received remained in the hall for some thirty years, until the Lodge removed to the new hall, when, the room being furnished in a different style, there was no appropriate place to be found for it, without marring the symmetry of the lodge, and it was thrown among the rubbish. However, the apron he wore that night still remains. General Lafayette personally presented the apron which he wore at this visit to Brother Adna Adams Treat, then Worshipful Master, who had received him. In later years Brother Treat had the further distinction of being the oldest life member of the Grand Lodge of New York, and at the time of his death in 1900, at the age of almost one hundred four years, he was the oldest living Mason in the United States. The apron was handed down to Brother Treat's son, Charles A. Treat of Denver, who in turn gave it to his brother, Marcus J. R. Treat of Hayes City, Kansas, and he presented it to his nephew, Nathan 0. Vosburgh, P.M., for many years Treasurer of Albert Pike Lodge No. 117 whom on September 27, 1928 presented it to his Lodge where it has resided since.
The apron now sets on display at every regular meeting of Albert Pike Lodge No.117 at Denver Masonic Temple Building located in Denver Colorado, for all regualr Masons to view.

I welcome discussion. Lazulilasher (talk) 19:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I hasten to add that it is already mentioned in the article that Lafayette was a Mason. Lazulilasher (talk) 19:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

i would say that Lafayette's membership was part of his salon in France, these were the freethinkers that developed the moderate (Girondin?) position, and the Droites des hommes. Lafayette didn't know how he was playing with fire, how the plebes might be so Enlightened. Lafayette brought some of the American Masonry back to France, along with the order of the cincinnati. (was it lost in translation?) the boilerplate above dosn't give the flavor, (is this too impressionistic?) also, i would be leary of Masonic story telling without a firm provenance, there are lot's of aprons out there; however, the key to the Bastille did get to Washington, so it's not impossible Pohick2 (talk) 02:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, Lafayette's involvement is mentioned in our article--in reference to the salon in Paris (as you say). I have read in reliable sources that it was there he heard many incendiary speeches, as the monarchy was unable to control speech as well as they could on the "outside". I think that is noted in the article. My opinion is that the Mason bits included are sufficient, but who knows, I could be wrong. Lazulilasher (talk) 03:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

it would be nice if there was an historical article about Masonry during the revolution, in the U.S. and in France, Lafayette was in that mix. Pohick2 (talk) 23:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Adrienne

"Adrienne then organized the family's finances"

I would like to see a sentence or two about Adrienne's regaining the family castles, property (some of them, Chauvinnac?) after release from prison, Lafayette was debilitated from prison, and she held it together Pohick2 (talk) 02:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Adrienne's work on behalf of the family was remarkable. I'll add a line or two tomorrow if you don't beat me to it. Lazulilasher (talk) 03:10, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

naw you write better than me - here's a link to the musee lafayette chauvinac http://www.chateau-lafayette.com/us/indexus.htm Pohick2 (talk) 03:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Ha, that's too kind. In fact, I wrote much of the content; however, an editor with whom I collaborate often came behind me to clean the prose. It is him who is responsible for the flow/prose. Lazulilasher (talk) 19:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

"Adrienne released" - "During the Terror (1793-4), Adrienne’s grand-mother, her mother and one of her sisters were guillotined; she owed her life to the American ambassador Gouverneur Morris" (from Cornell website) I believe it's also in the Morris bio, might be worth a mention Pohick2 (talk) 16:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll take a look shortly. Lazulilasher (talk) 19:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I added a bit more, take a look and let me know what you think. Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 15:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

good (i realize the more detail, the greater the length) but it does make the narrative more accurate, nuanced. Pohick2 (talk) 02:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree. It doesn't add too much length and provides a nuanced detail. Lazulilasher (talk) 02:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

external links

btw here's an external link, might have some stuff of interest http://www.friendsoflafayette.org/data/genlaff.html

another (i know this mcjoynt fellow) has some good stuff, maps of barren hill and virginia campaign, hmm too much detail http://xenophongroup.com/mcjoynt/lafy-4.htm Pohick2 (talk) 02:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

one of the maps of barren hill is LOC so should be available Pohick2 (talk) 16:38, 29 September 2008 (UTC) the barren hill image is here [17]and [18]- you can zoom in to read the French description (love those French engineers) had difficulty downloading the .jp2 file, maybe that would be better to link to? Pohick2 (talk) 18:14, 7 October 2008 (UTC) writing on left side: Plan de la retraite de Barren Hill en Pennsylvanie ou un detachment de deux mille deux cent hommes sour le Genl LaFayette sois[?] ensource j[?] l'Armee Anglois source le Genl Howe, Clinton, Gram[?] le 28 may 1778. ....Pohick2 (talk) 18:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

ancestry

i'm surprised the the de la fayette peerage is not there unlike Duke of Noailles, but i suppose it's work for another day Pohick2 (talk) 16:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

FYI it's because the Dukes are listed, List of French_peerages, developed, and the marquisates are not. (I always knew he married up.) [[19]] One intrepid soul is only up to the B's. Pohick2 (talk) 21:08, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
now moved to List_of_marquisates_in_France Pohick2 (talk) 18:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Jacobins

Lafayette and his wife were impeached or arrested by Jacobins in August-September 1792? Really now? The dethroning of Louis XVI was a Girondin project; the Jacobins did not take power until the end of 1792 at the earliest. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:04, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Questionable edits

Any reason people accepted these anonymous edits over the last month or so? Their consequences are in the article as it stands. [20] (uncited); [21] (unexplained removal), [22] (unexplained removal); [23] (uncited). - Jmabel | Talk 06:15, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Copied FAC to article talk space

I copied the failed /FAC nom here; so that it may be edited without disturbing the original document. Lazulilasher (talk) 00:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

This is not English

News, as an English noun, needs a terminal s, just as Versailles does. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:35, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Appointments aren't slowed, they are delayed. Do let us know when this page will be stable enough to clean up.Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Hmm...I fixed the new-->news. It should take me a few days...or, go ahead and edit (I don't mind edit conflicts). I was going to come to your talk page yesterday and mention what I was doing; I'd thought it'd be a good opportunity for the date thing. Perhaps we should mention that on the talk page for a few days to see if there's an objection (I don't object). Lazulilasher (talk) 03:49, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
  - I won't have time or resources until after Christmas even for copyediting, and the French sections really need rewriting. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
    - Yes, we agree on that. I've been preparing for a rewrite of the French section for the past month or so. I am in the process of doing that now. It should be enough on its way for another look, by then. Have a nice holiday, I'll see you on the flipside. Lazulilasher (talk) 05:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
      - Lazu, i notice you don't have a reference to the Unger biography, or the books of Lafayette letters. (or rather the Lafayette - Jefferson letters) I will make a trip to the reference room in the new year, and see what i can find. (i do blockquote subjects too much) ''pohick'' (talk) 13:03, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Among the major errors and dishonesties of the present text, which reads like the product of an illiterate and bigoted royalist:

Lafayette was not responsible for the Constitution of 1791; the Constituent Assembly had been working on it for two years.
While a royal veto did become questionable when it became clear how Louis was likely to use it, it was part of the constitution as enacted.
He stood for mayor of Paris in the fall of 1791, and was defeated by Jérôme Pétion de Villeneuve.
Lafayette's campaign of 1792, which had limited success, should be included; so should the role of Charles François Dumouriez.
In June 1792, Lafayette left his troops, then engaged with the enemy, without permission of the Minister of War; he then threatened the Legislature by claiming to speak for the troops. (The failure of his mutiny in September suggests that he was wrong.) He was impeached for being AWOL and for sedition, and IIRC the vote on the impeachment was much closer than two to one.
His disputes, therefore, were with the Girondins, then in power; the Jacobins did not take over until May 1793.
- From what I understand, Lafayette was concerned about the Jacobin's growing power. Lazulilasher (talk) 15:53, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

The Jacobins then tried and executed the Girondins chiefly for cooperating with Lafayette; but the claims of the Revolutionary Tribunal are not generally regarded as a reliable source. (But cf. Albert Mathiez, however, for as much of that PoV as is defensible.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:31, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I look forward to seeing what Lazulilasher does with this after he does some research; it is hopeless without. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:52, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think much of the problem was that the French section was largely based on 1911 Brittanica. Lazulilasher (talk) 15:11, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks that way; the rest of it is our editors, who have misunderstood the Britannica's half truths and PoV into outright falsehood. I think the Britannica is also correct in saying that Lafayette was made head of the National Guard by acclamation rather than by anybocy's appointment. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Sources variously say "appointed", "acclaimed", "made the popular choice", and "declared"; but, from what I can tell, he was not appointed. Lazulilasher (talk) 19:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Date order

The above discussion is whether, in an article on an American citizen, it would be appropriate to restore the date format July 4, 1776, instead of 4 July 1776. The former was used until quite recently; it was changed at the impulse of one editor, who thinks there is only one right way to do dates.

Is there objection to switching back? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I generally have no opinion regarding the use of dates. In this case, due to Lafayette's activities in Europe and the United States, an argument could be waged for either format. I support Pmanderson's proposal because Lafayette has strong national ties to the United States; and, I find it more likely that a student would be assigned reading about Lafayette from that country. Lazulilasher (talk) 18:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Education, Marriage & Early Service?

The article neglects these significant periods in La Fayette's life. Currently it jumps from his birth straight to his American adventures! Where are they? Information on his education and early career is well documented; surprised nobody has bothered to include it in the man's bio! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.110.197.240 (talk) 13:48, 14 February 2012‎ (UTC)

Battle of Pacman 3.0????

What is this event? A (bad) joke? (it figured in the list of battles but I had no idea of how to delete it) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.27.100.115 (talk) 13:58, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Tidying up the streets

Streets named after Lafayette were listed in two places in the "honors" section, so I have combined these, and added ulice Lafayettova, the street named after Lafayette, close to the prison where he was held in Olomouc, Czech Republic. Gordoncph (talk) 07:52, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

In the same spirit, I can report that there is a motorway service station named in Lafayette's honour on the A75 motorway south of Clermont Ferrand. This service station is the motorway service area closest to Lafayette's home in Auvergne.Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 00:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Gilbert du Motier, marquis de Lafayette → Marquis de Lafayette

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. The arguments opposed to moving are significantly stronger than those who wish to rename. - UtherSRG (talk) 03:41, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Gilbert du Motier, marquis de Lafayette → Marquis de Lafayette –, per WP:COMMMONNAME. The proposed form is used by Encyclopedia of World Biography and by The Oxford Companion to American Military History. Hundreds of books use it in their titles. This ngram suggests that "Marquis de Lafayette" is vastly more common than any version of the name that includes "Gilbert du Motier." Contemporaries also used the proposed form, as you can see here.relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 14:17, 21 March 2012 (UTC) Kauffner (talk) 13:42, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Support per WP:Mouthful. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:21, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Support. Gilbert du who? I like to saw logs! (talk) 07:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Comment according to this article, the marquisate existed before Gilbert du Motier, since his father held the title as well. So there seems to be a missing article on the title and exactly when it was raised. 70.24.251.71 (talk) 11:15, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose -- With very few exceptions, an article such as the target should be an article on all holders of the title, not merely the most notable. At present we do not have such an article, but the space (currently a redirect to the most notbale holder) should be left for a list article on all title-holders. When created, the list artile would need a hatnote for the present redirect. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:25, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Comment. Marquis de Lafayette is already a redirect to this article. La Fayette family is supposed to be the title article here, but it does not tell you much of anything. Even in terms of British dukedoms, there is already a Duke of Wellington (title) and a Duke of Marlborough (title). As for marquis titles, very few get their own articles. Why would a title automatically take priority over other meanings of a term? It is certainly not the most likely desired topic, at least not in this situation. Kauffner (talk) 15:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- Comment but it isn't it doesn't cover the marquis title, only the descendants of Gilbert, who changed their surname to La Fayette. 65.92.180.188 (talk) 04:11, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose per Peterkingiron's arguments above and per my arguments on Lafayette elsewhere. FactStraight (talk) 20:48, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Reply. Based on your earlier comments, it is not obvious why you would oppose this RM. Are you suggesting that the lemma Marquis de Lafayette should lead to an article other than this one? Quite frankly, I think that would confuse a lot of readers. (Over 5,400 a month, to be exact.) Kauffner (talk) 00:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Oppose His common name is not "Marquis of Lafayette" but just "Lafayette". I had heard of him, knew a little about him, but did not realise that he was a marquis. We already have a similar situation with several British people e.g. Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston, "Lord Palmerston" already redirects there, many people who have heard of him will not know his surname. PatGallacher (talk) 10:53, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose per Peterkingiron. -DJSasso (talk) 14:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose Per PatGallacher: I think WP:COMMONNAME actually supports a move to Lafayette instead. Regards So Why 20:19, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
As second reference, maybe, but not on first reference. Just because he's recognizable without first name doesn't mean we omit it or title, when that is how someone is commonly known on first reference, e.g. Robespierre, Saint-Simon, Goethe, Münchhausen, etc. FactStraight (talk) 00:15, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Support. The main reason for the Bob Smith, Duke of X titling format is because multiple people were the Duke of X, so just calling them the Duke of X (as is often common in the time) isn't specific enough. I'm not aware of any vaguely notable Marquis de Lafayette other than, well, the Marquis de Lafayette, and practically nobody knows the Gilbert du Motier name. Agree that just "Lafayette" has something of an argument, but "Marquis de Lafayette" is better than the current title. So. SnowFire (talk) 02:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Weak support, per RM request; I like the conciseness too. There is a potential problem with moving an article about an individual to a title held by that individual, if others may have held the same title - but as far as I can tell, this one is much more notable. If moved I'd want some kind of hatnote or some other arrangement so that readers landing on this page could easily find his father Michel du Motier, Marquis de La Fayette. bobrayner (talk) 14:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

WTF - opinon? this what wikiledia does NOW????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.163.218.6 (talk) 21:13, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Acquired?

>Lafayette learned that the Continental Congress did not have the money for his voyage; hence, he acquired the sailing ship La Victoire with his own funds

Does this mean he bought the ship or that he paid for his own passage? Rissa, Guild of Copy Editors (talk) 04:06, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

It seems he bought it. Is it ambiguous?--Wehwalt (talk) 12:12, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

maybe rented?--109.188.126.16 (talk) 02:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

One more son

According to Wikipedia in French, it seems that there is another son of his died in 1778. Lsls421 (talk) 06:14, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Do they give a source?--Wehwalt (talk) 09:13, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

The second paragraph of this article states that Lafayette became an officer at "age 1,003." 76.115.0.196 (talk) 23:59, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

We try to keep out vandalism, but with all the attention from it being on the main page, ...--Wehwalt (talk) 00:01, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Tag

I've removed the undue tag. Please remember that this recently passed FAC, which is a consensus process, and so there is consensus that the version that passed FAC did not give undue weight.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:06, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

^ ^a ^b Cite error: The named reference Memoires was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Jenny Fay de LaTour-Maubourg, retrieved 1 December 2007
^ Mattox | Natural Allies

[Memoires-1] Cite error: The named reference Memoires was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[2] Jenny Fay de LaTour-Maubourg, retrieved 1 December 2007

[3] Mattox | Natural Allies

[1]

[2]

[3]