Talk:GRECE

France Low‑importance

	France portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Requested move[edit]

Groupement de recherche et d'études sur la culture européenne → Groupement de recherche et d'études pour la civilisation européenne – {This is the real name for the GRECE} copied from the entry on the WP:RM page

Done. —Nightst a llion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 09:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GRECE and published scholars[edit]

GRECE is often described as neofascist or drawing from fascist themes. Obscure debates over the terms Left and Right do not trump serious published scholars who call GRECE far right, extreme right, or neofascist.--Cberlet 22:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See: Wikipedia:Avoid self-references--Cberlet 22:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinks are created by wikipedia editors, not by "serious published scholars." GRECE actually does not define itself as a political think tank, but just 'as a think tank'. So the introduction in both cases needs to be changed. Furthermore, entering the criticism before there has been even one word said about GRECE itself is intellectually dishonest, and does not allow readers of the article to make up their own minds.

About Benoist being a 'far-right militant', I am not sure what a 'far-right militant' is, I do know what a militant is. Intangible 23:03, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop this nonsense. I am sorry you disagree with a pile of published authors. It must be annoying. But it has no weight here at Wikipedia. Please stop this campaign of nitpicking that has now spread across several pages that you are editing to reflect your highly biased POV. Published scholars trump your POV.

Then make explicit what your "published authors" are saying, instead just blindly refering to a further reading section or a local library.

I am sorry you disagree with a pile of published authors. Where have I stated this? Intangible 02:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By deleting references to the right-wing background and character of GRECE. Please stop playing silly games. Go to a library if you challenge the cites I have provided.--Cberlet 02:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If your authors say GRECE has a 'right-wing' background make it explicit in the article. Intangible 02:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Assume good faith, and go to a library.--Cberlet 02:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dont have assume good faith on part of your "published authors". Actually, I am quite sure your "published authors" have no consensus at all in whatever they are alleging, see the work of Pierre-André Taguieff. Intangible 17:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of contention about this. Please publish all the sources you are talking about on the talk page as well as on the main page so that others can evaluate these sources. Also, it ought to be recognized that a "pile" of "published scholars" is not necessarily more persuasive than one unpublished nonscholar. It all depends on what they have to say, the assumptions they make, and the extent to which what they say can be verified. Basic ground rules of scholarship here. So far I just see two books cited on the main page, I know there are more than that which are relevant to this subject.xproudfoot June 27 2006

direct quote needed[edit]

Can someone provide a direct quote from these sources. They are not widely available books. Intangible 16:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ey[edit]

Just because they use pagan symbolism doesn't mean they're fascists. These symbols existed before Hitler, you know. The article needs some info on the actual movement instead of beating around the bush by saying what everyone else thinks about it without even stating what they are criticising. Joffeloff 15:22, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cberlet entered this criticism originally, without giving direct quotes. He's the one to talk to. Intangible 22:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noone has ownership of any page, and so it is up to anyone to correct the mistakes of others - personally I don't know French, so unfortunately all I can do is call out for someone with the ability to improve this to do so. Joffeloff 22:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note to Intangible: Please go to Talk:Front National (France) where we can have a broader discussion with other editors about your numerous deletions of criticisms on pages concerning the European New Right.--Cberlet 13:58, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The FN is not part of the (European) New Right. Intangible 14:15, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect translation[edit]

"Groupement de recherche et d'études pour la civilisation européenne" cannot possibly be translated as "Study and research group regarding European Culture", for two reasons. First, "civilisation" is obviously not the same as "culture". Second, "pour" means "for" and not "regarding". There's an important semantic difference. GRECE's name implies that the group not only studies but also supports European civilization, whatever that means in practice. No political judgment intended here.

Here's my point: the correct translation is "Research and Study Group for European Civilization". This wording is backed by quite a few articles after a google research. I'll correct it.Tnapoleao 06:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]