Jump to content

Talk:Belgium

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mikhailfranco (talk | contribs) at 12:33, 27 February 2024 (→‎Glaring Omission?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured articleBelgium is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 4, 2004.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 8, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
June 22, 2005Featured article reviewDemoted
August 16, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
August 26, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 21, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
November 12, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
June 21, 2007Featured article reviewKept
August 10, 2007Featured article reviewKept
August 2, 2011Featured article reviewDemoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 4, 2004, October 4, 2007, October 4, 2008, October 4, 2009, October 4, 2010, July 21, 2011, July 21, 2012, and July 21, 2013.
Current status: Former featured article

Folklore

Your affirmation "A major non-official holiday is the Saint-Nicolas (Sint Nicholas in English) Day, a festivity for children in Belgium and also for students" is not correct. Saint Nicholas Day is also celebrated for students in all University towns in Belgium. Many drivers stuck in the traffic would confirm it was because of the Sint Nicholas students's procession in Brussels. Eva. 23March2010-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.58.82.178 (talk) 14:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


PS: ridiculous comments about Belgium once again among other stupid comments from French and other Wikipedians about other items and articles!

Is it the outcome of Wikipedia's idealistic project about which I wasted my time attending a MOOC course on the French platform FUN early this year ?? See at https://www.fun-mooc.fr/courses/WMFr/86001/session01/info.

Now I am telling you frankly after +/- 6 months personal experience: I found out all those VAIN, FUTILE 'guerres d'édition'/ 'edit warring' (such nice words!!): the black side of Wikipedia!

Matter of EGOS only !

HOW DISAPPOINTING!

Read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring & https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Guerre_d%27%C3%A9dition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Lamest_edit_wars & https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Guerres_d%27%C3%A9dition_les_plus_futiles.

Actually most of them are completely VAIN (EN) / FUTILES (FR)! Just a matter of common sense ~~-— Preceding unsigned comment added by AIlurus (talkcontribs) 06:22, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Glaring Omission?

No mention of the London Conference (1830) and the Treaty of London (1839) that created Belgium? The treaty by which Belgium "...became internationally recognised as the Kingdom of Belgium."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Conference_of_1830

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_London_(1839)

I have not done any article-archaeology to see it if was mentioned before, and was edited out for some reason, but let's say I find it very surprising, but not eunexpected.

Karel Van Noppen and not Karen Van Noppen

Just a tiny typo in the name Karel Van Noppen (in the section "Independent Belgium"). I'd correct it myself but the page is protected. The name links to a page with the correct name, Karel.-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:1810:4f0b:500:31eb:a2eb:314f:6739 (talk) 23:31, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:43, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is French a "lingua franca" in Brussels or just the dominant language?

I reverted an edit and my revert was reverted without discussion [1] so I am bringing it here. The justifying remark draws attention to a new article we have with the strange title (to me as a native English speaker) of "Francization of Brussels", and claims that it is more neutral and exact to call French a lingua franca in Brussels and not just the dominant language of Brussels. I don't get the point being made though, and I request explanation. To me, claiming that French is a lingua franca is tantamount to saying that it is a second language used by speakers of other languages. That is a quite complex claim, which needs a good source, and no new sourcing has been offered for this. As a Belgian I understand French is today simply the dominant language of Brussels. By this I mean it is the primary FIRST language of people living in Brussels. Other interesting facts may be added, but this is a big simple one which deserves to be put there up front. Am I wrong? And what is the source for this new wording? Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:51, 9 June 2023 (UTC) BTW as a resident of Flanders I know that many Flemish people actually deliberately push discussion to Flemish or even English because they don't want to use French as a lingua franca in Brussels, even if they would speak French happily in Paris. So this is not a simple issue here that no one ever talks about. We should pick the right wording.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:55, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2023

There is an estimated 30,000 Romani people in Belgium. Add this to the demographics section.

Source: https://minorityrights.org/country/belgium/ 103.164.138.55 (talk) 22:36, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Pinchme123 (talk) 04:52, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 November 2023

Bandyta L.N.G (talk) 19:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want to change statistics because it's outdated

Can you be more specific? Which statistics are out of date? Please if possible also give your evidence. Which sources are you comparing to?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:40, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Per response from Lancaster. -- Pinchme123 (talk) 05:47, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Land area

Article says most recent measurement of land area used new methodology, but says "Unlike previous calculations, this one included the area from the coast to the low-water line, revealing the country to be 160 km2 (62 sq mi) larger in surface area than previously thought." Last two words indicate change in thought, not change in methodology. Suggest changing to "…than measured using previous methodology." IronJohnSr (talk) 14:49, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]