Wikipedia

Talk:Charter of the French Language/Archive 2

< Talk:Charter of the French Language
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Mapsax in topic Bill 96

"Knowledge or a specific level of knowledge of a language other than French is prohibited..."

Latest comment: 12 years ago12 comments8 people in discussion

Is that really true? That would mean that, in order to obtain jobs that don't require foreign language knowledge, you'd be forbidden from knowing any language other than French.--172.162.155.251 (talk) 22:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

This is a bad English translation. They mean: The employer can't add an other language required in the criterias, excepted if the knowledge of an other language is necessary for working in this type of job. Jimmy Lavoie × Vive le Québec! talk 23:43, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

That's almost of the same level in my opinion. I can see that requiring French would comply with the Charter and fulfill its purpose, but forbidding the requirement of other languages serves no purpose for the protection of the French language. It shouldn't matter if French is already required, French is present and if other languages are required then that's extra and that doesn't damage French in Quebec. It's just a way to tell people that it's OK to know French as an only language so that they can get jobs anyway, and it's also OK to be unable to communicate with people in countries other than faraway francophone countries proficiently (in fact, with people in their own country as well) probably because the OQLF wants to keep any instances of any foreign languages to a minimum. I highly speculate that a sovereign Quebec would ban foreign languages, just as Benito Mussolini did in his fascist Italy. If it weren't for the fact that we were still part of Canada, the sign law would still ban other languages than French from being on signs at all.--172.165.251.8 (talk) 19:31, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

The laws want that in Quebec, a French language province, you’re not required to speak another language than French to work somewhere where English is not necessary. It protects French language, as some employers could want to hire only English speakers. Jimmy Lavoie × Vive le Québec! talk 02:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

And what to make of all the non-French speakers in Quebec? French courses aren't absolutely mandatory for all people in Quebec. There are some people who don't know the language, including the sad case of a 71-year-old woman who had major problems in a hospital, just because she had to go to a French hospital because they had more money and would not provide overly long waiting periods, as did English hospitals. This means that, unless you need the services of a translator or something, employers aren't allowed to cater to those non-French speakers by requiring that employees speak both French and another language. Most jobs don't really require other languages, so most jobs would be forbidden from requiring them. By making this law, the government is basically saying, "You must speak French or else we won't care about protecting your rights or your life." Of course, it is possible that requiring English, etc. is allowed in places such as Montreal due to the large volume of English speakers, but I'm unsure if that is true. If the OQLF had their way, analogies to the Gestapo would be stronger than ever. They'd forbid absolutely any instances of any foreign languages, even spoken in the home, to avoid "alarming trends" and to make sure that everybody is part of Quebec's "sole identity", meaning that everybody would share the same Québecois French identity and (hopefully) mindset. Pauline Marois already believes that everybody in Quebec should live in French- although this isn't even near the extent to the hypothetical situation that I stated here (she even said that she respects the rights of the anglophone minority), this could extend to a totalitarian mindset in the distant/somewhat near future. Right now the cops would come to my door just for posting in this English Wikipedia. 172.163.115.213 (talk) 14:06, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

  • I also think that the reason why we don't have "les maudits anglais" anymore is because, thanks to Bill 101, anglophones have been forced into being more like the majority, except that they just happened to have known English before French. As a result, the differences between the francophone majority and the anglophone minority are now fewer, and soon may not exist at all. How would the francophones feel if a natural disaster suddenly forced them to leave Quebec, and then they were forced to migrate to other provinces, and those provinces provided strict legislation similar to Bill 101 except with English?172.163.115.213 (talk) 14:17, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
First of all, you’re not on Wikipedia to say what's your opinion about the subject. You must respect the neutral point of view. All you said before is not related to the article. We’re not here to criticize the laws. Quebec is a French language province and employers can’t require the knowledge of English to be employed. That's it. If you don't know what you are talking about, don't say anything. If you need help about the article, continue writing here, otherwise, stop writing here. It's not a forum or a debate, it's a Wikipedia article. You don't like those laws? We don't care... We're here to say what the laws state. All people in Quebec are supposed to know French, as it's a French language province. If you go in France, you won't get special English services only because you speak English... If we (Québécois) go to U.S.A., we won't get special French language services, as it's an English country. So please, contribute to the article if you want, but stay neutral. Have a nice day, Jimmy Lavoie × Vive le Québec! talk 16:20, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Your sins in level of constructiveness and cooperation appear to be worse than anything the other posters have said. In particular, as it is clear that you have and expound a pro-french attitude. Pot, meet the kettle.

88.77.189.75 (talk) 19:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The above comments are out of place here. Please go on a discussion board if you want to debate. What Jimmy Lavoie states are facts on the ground. From what he wrote I get no indication that he supports or not the bill; And that the way to do things here.MVictorP (talk) 16:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Is it true that Quebec is the only French-speaking part of the Commonwealth?
She's your queen too, mate (elle est ta reine aussi, mon ami) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.43.189 (talk) 22:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I don't know about the French exclusivity, but Quebec is indeed a part of the Commonwealth since the Conquest. The Queen is on our currency, and drops in for an official visit from time to time. There is a respresentative of the Queen at the Assemblée Nationale.MVictorP (talk) 16:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Mauritius is also largely french-speaking, even though English is the language of government there. 80.254.183.233 (talk) 11:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Status of the French language

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The second line under the "Official language" heading is factually incorrect. The Official Language Act of 1974, aka Bill 22, did declare that French was the sole official language of Quebec, but that law was repealed by the Charter, as is indicated by the article Official Language Act

That line should be removed, or modified to acknowledge that in many cases the government must communicate in English with citizens.

BarbarianDude (talk) 12:21, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Terrible paragraph

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The use of the notwithstanding clause in the 1990s to circumvent the Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms also drew a francophobic reaction in other Canadian provinces; the syndrome de Sault Ste. Marie was a series of symbolic but divisive resolutions by some municipalities outside Quebec declaring their towns unilingually English in protest of this supposed infringement on the rights embodied in the charter.

This is encyclopedic and dripping with condescension. It needs to be fixed. --69.196.140.49 (talk) 20:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree. In the "Opposition and Support" part, the author conveniently forgot about the "support" part, and shows facts manipulation here and there in a connotated way, such as his extrapolated conclusion that Toronto replaced Montreal as Canada's metropolis as a direct result of the French law, ignoring all of the economical development history and geopolitics aspects. It strikes me as POV. This part of the article, at least, needs some re-working. MVictorP (talk) 17:01, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Paragraph with comparing Bill 101 and Holocaust (and black racism)

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I removed this paragraph entirely. This paragraph was not based on facts and was pure propaganda. I'm open to discussion but this paragraph was IMO not up to Wikipedia standards and more an opinion. The truth is, there is no slaves nor genocide of non-french speaking people because of law 101. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Statique (talk • contribs) 05:00, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Opposition and Support

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This paragraph states that companies such as Sun Life and Bank of Montreal relocated to Toronto as a result of the adoption of this law, but the only source cited for all the companies mentioned is a brief PDF article on the marketing strategy of BMO which speaks nothing of any other company and itself has no sources cited. Though it has become conventional wisdom to talk of this supposed commercial exodus, I think it needs to be proven officially before it can be portrayed as the encyclopaedic truth. I recommend either deleting this or citing reliable sources.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.21.24.180 (talk • contribs) 05:19, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Possible sources

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

WhisperToMe (talk) 21:03, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

English and French versions of this page - different discourses?

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have noticed that the English version of this entry gives a comprehensive account of the criticisms of bill 101, however, the French version curiously omits the criticisms from the discourse. Would it be possible to incorporate aspects of the "Criticism" section in the French version? Doing so would help improve the quality of the discourse. Or, is criticism of bill 101 still too "politically charged" for the 21st century? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.63.56.252 (talk) 15:26, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Charter of the French Language. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 13:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on Charter of the French Language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:01, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Charter of the French Language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:41, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Bill 96

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Bill 96, An Act respecting French, the official and common language of Québec Mapsax (talk) 23:38, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Charter_of_the_French_Language/Archive_2&oldid=1042531305"