Talk:Valais

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do you think that the History section of this article is worth simplifying, or should I just get rid of it? -Razorflame 20:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about using this as a history, or as a starting point for your own simplification? -- Barliner  talk  20:25, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History[change source]

The Romans called the area Vallis Poenina ("Upper Rhône Valley").

In 888 Valais became a part of the kingdom of Jurane Burgundy.

King Rudolph III of Burgundy gave the area to the Bishop of Sion in 999, and made him Count of the Valais. The count-bishops had to to defend their area against the dukes of Savoy.

Valais did not follow the Protestant Reformation.

On March 12, 1529, Valais became an associate member (Zugewandter Ort) of the Swiss Confederation.

In 1628 the Valais became a republic, the République des Sept Dizains / Republik der Sieben Zehenden but the bishop remained in power until Napoleon's troops invaded the Valais and created the République du Valais on March 16 1798 but on May 1 1798 became part of the Helvetic Republic and independent again in 1802 as the Rhodanic Republic.

In 1810 the Rhodanic Republic was made a part of France, and was called the Simplon Department.

Valais became independent again in 1813 and on August 4, 1815 decided to join the Swiss confederation as a canton (state).

In 1845 the Valais joined the Catholic separatist league (Sonderbund), but never fought federal troops when other members of the league started fighting in 1847.

Yes, I think I will use this as the starting block for my simplification. -Razorflame 20:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good article proposal[change source]

I've decided that this article is good enough to meet the Good Article requirements. Razorflame 03:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the following at least need to be improved:

  1. Demographics/Cities sections confused.
  2. Too many redlinks, even without the 14 lists of places.
  3. History section sketchy.
  4. Possible simplify Economy section.
  5. New section heading needed instead of demographics.

Also 45% of the content is the IW, towns, and cities lists --Bärliner 12:55, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Razorflame 16:01, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]