This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

France: French communes C‑class Top‑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 C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the scope of WikiProject French communes, a project which is currently considered to be inactive. Politics C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The article, on several occasions, passes some judgment on political decisions: it seems to advocate the regrouping of communes, it claims that France is a very conservative country, etc. I think it would need a dose of neutralization. David.Monniaux 19:04, 1 April 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Personally I don't agree. The word "conservative" in itself implies no particular judgement. It just describes reality. Something conservative is something that remains stable over time, that doesn't change. On that respect, we can say that administrative limits in France are conservative, because it is a fact that they have seldom changed in the last 200 years. To say that France is a conservative country in terms of its administrative limits is just a statement of fact. It is plain obvious that reforms of the administrative grid have been opposed widely for decades, and that there are many people absolutely opposed to getting rid of the départements. That's plain conservatism. Saying that, we don't imply anything good or bad about it. There are people who love conservatism, and there are people who hate it. We just describe reality. Hardouin 00:27, 12 April 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, "conservative" is a judgment on the willingness of people to change things, and in this case was not applied only with respect to administrative limits. One may note for instance that France is not very conservative when it comes to changing constitutional rules, for instance.

Apart from that, the article made ample use of laudative or depreciative words. Let us for instance consider this sentence I rephrased: Another absurd example is Paris [...]. "Absurd" is in the eye of the beholder. I am sure that there are many thoughtful considerate and intelligent people who could provide us with some good reasons why Paris should not be merged into the same commune as the "little crown" (I note for instance that the government had to split the Seine département, which encompassed Paris and the little crown, because it was unwieldy to manage).

So, please, let us remove the judgmental bits. This article is very well documented, but it should not be an advocacy piece. David.Monniaux 05:55, 2 October 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, David, you are wrongly bringing your own negative views of the word 'conservative' into the discussion. If you like, 'traditional' might be an appropriate substitution.

con⋅serv⋅a⋅tive   /kənˈsɜrvətɪv/ [kuhn-sur-vuh-tiv] Show IPA –adjective 1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change. 2. cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate. 3. traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit. 4. (often initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the Conservative party. 5. (initial capital letter) of, pertaining to, or characteristic of Conservative Jews or Conservative Judaism. 6. having the power or tendency to conserve; preservative. 7. Mathematics. (of a vector or vector function) having curl equal to zero; irrotational; lamellar. –noun 8. a person who is conservative in principles, actions, habits, etc. 9. a supporter of conservative political policies. 10. (initial capital letter) a member of a conservative political party, esp. the Conservative party in Great Britain. 11. a preservative.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conservative

Saji Loupgarou (talk) 05:08, 25 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I read : It is unclear yet where the trend is going. Will the intercommunal structures have representatives directly elected by the citizens in the future, as the Mauroy Report proposed in 2000? But then wouldn't this leave the communes like hollow administrative units?

But de facto, most of French communes are already nothing but administrative units, the main role of the mayor being acting as a deconcentrated agent of the state, all decentralized power being given to the intercommunal structure (and tht explain Mauroy's choice to leave the seat of Mayor in Lille to become President of the intercommunality). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.161.27.52 (talk) 14:16, 12 April 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What you say is exagerated. For one, there's a very important power left in the hands of mayors: municipal police. As heads of municipal police, mayors are not acting as deconcentrated agents of the state. Also, not all matters have been transferred to the intercommunal structures. In communities of communes especially, the mayors still keep many powers. Hardouin 17:28, 12 April 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree with you, but I think there is already an obvious trend that leads to the suppression of almost all decentralized power of the mayor. Therefore and I don't think Mauroy's rapport will change anything about that. Revas 21:52, 12 April 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For noate I made a template Template:French communes to Mirror the one on FR wikipedia... with a few minor changes you can take the data from the French pages and add it to the English ones... See the template talk page for some issues or anything else about it. gren 23:36, 1 June 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is no list of communes of French Polynesia. French Polynesia is also not mentioned in the article Commune in France nor in the article Lists of communes of France. Do the communes in French Polynesia have some kind of special status and are not mentioned because of that?

In the French-language Wikipedia, there is already a collection (although not a list) of communes in French Polynesia: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communes_de_Polyn%C3%A9sie_fran%C3%A7aise.

Here is also a list (the numbers in this list coincide with the list in the French-language Wikipedia):
http://www.statoids.com/ypf.html .

Yet another list (with missing numbers):
http://www.world-gazetteer.com/wg.php?x=1126512541&men=gcis&lng=en&gln=xx&dat=32&srt=npan&col=aohdq&geo=-169.

-- Citylover 08:17, 12 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

French Polynesia is divided into communes, like the rest of France. These communes have the regular status of French communes. Hardouin 14:18, 21 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If we are to nitpick, one may point that not all France is divided into communes (the TAAF aren't, for instance, and I'm unsure about Wallis and Futuna with their customary rulers). David.Monniaux 05:37, 2 October 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I read the article, and it is very interesting. Here is a suggestion:

• Doesn't the word communism come from commune ? If so, it could be mentionned

Ze miguel 10:35, 20 October 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not exactly, commune is derived from the latin word "communia" meaning a gathering of people sharing a common life- aka a community, and communism is from the latin "communis" meaning things held in common.Xerex 12:14, 1 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is what the Online Etymology Dictionary says:

• communism : 1843, from Fr. communisme (c.1840) from commun (O.Fr. comun; see common) + -isme. Originally a theory of society; as name of a political system, 1850, a translation of Ger. Kommunismus, in Marx and Engels' "Manifesto of the German Communist Party." The first use of communist (n.) is by Goodwyn Barmby, who founded the London Communist Propaganda Society in 1841. Shortened form Commie attested from 1940.

Hardouin 18:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In the 'Intercommunality' section, it says:

There are two types of intercommunal structures:

* ...
* ...

These three structures are given varying levels of fiscal power, ...

Could someone who knows their facts on this make this piece a little clearer please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.74.0.220 (talk) 13:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maybe we could put that in somewere? --Comanche cph 08:47, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

In commune (subnational entity). — Poulpy 10:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Large parts of this article sound like poorly translated French. IT could benefit from copyediting from a native english speaker. I'm gonna go ahead and tag it. Niczar ⏎ 07:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Still is not using very good English. I changed "official sixth level administrative divisions." to "six official levels of government." See also my challenge on the use of the term "administrative division" on that article's talk page.173.189.77.96 (talk) 07:45, 13 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It appears that the introduction is an overly elaborate way of saying that "commune" in French means "community" in English. Unfree (talk) 19:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was surprised to find that mayors of French communes can also be politicians in the national legislature, or have other political jobs. Where I live, this is not permitted. Is this something common around the world? If not, perhaps, it would be an interesting fact to add somewhere to the page? I would like there to be a seperate section on the governance of communes on the page. Currently, there is literally only a single paragraph about governance at the end of the "status of communes" section. --Criticalthinker (talk) 07:46, 8 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At District page there is note that "in the 20th century, districts were a type of intercommunality". But in this page there is no mention of district word at all. Could somebody clarify both articles? Grv87 (talk) 18:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. I have the feeling, according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals), that this article should be renamed to Commune (France). I would appreciate some feedback on that. Regards, Freewol (talk) 14:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This section, in addition to lacking citations, fails to correctly communicate the concept of a median. The section starts, "The median population of metropolitan France's communes as of the 1999 census was 380 inhabitants." Later it says, "What the median population tells us is that the vast majority of the French communes only have some two hundred inhabitants; but there are also a small number of communes within much higher populations." A median number is one that has as many below as above, thus if there are 36,681 communes in France, there are about 18340 with population equal or small than 380, and about 18340 with population equal or larger. The "vast majority" of French communes cannot therefore have only some two hundred inhabitants. If this text comes from an uncited source, I don't want to change it (but perhaps a better source could be found?). If it is original content, it should be reworded to more clearly communicate what the median tells us. It could also include the average to shed further light on the fact that there are several densely-populated communes, and many more with very small populations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.219.123.169 (talk) 07:17, 6 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Communes of France. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add ((cbignore)) after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add ((nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot)) to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050103093724/http://droit.org:80/code/index-CGCTERRL.html to http://www.droit.org/code/index-CGCTERRL.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050112200608/http://www.droit.org:80/code/index-CGCTERRM.html to http://www.droit.org/code/index-CGCTERRM.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110708143214/http://big.chez.com/lpcornu/servstats01.htm to http://big.chez.com/lpcornu/servstats01.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:34, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The unsourced section (look for the dubious tag) of this article that I have been finding references for says the Paris commune was established 14 December 1789, but in the actual Paris Commune article from that time, that date is never mentioned and it gives a different date of 11 July 1789. BhamBoi (talk) 23:01, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]