Talk:Antwerp

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 April 2019 and 14 June 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sackhy.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Music

Cultuurmarkt van Vlaanderenisis which is a musical and art event added to the music section of the article, this festival happening every year during the month of August in Antwerp,Belgium Linkerwoofer is a pop-rock music festival that annually happens in Antwerp and located at the left bank of the Scheldt river, added to the music section.

Untitled

Francesco Guicciardini was NOT Venetian.

Name in Spanish

Why is the Spanish name of Antwerp here??? I understand the French name because a part of Belgium speak French.

Belgium was part of the Spanish Netherlands before, that's why. --Starstriker7(^{Say hi}_{or see my works}) 12:44, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Come on, that's silly. It hasn't been ruled by Spain in 300 years. Spanish is no longer a relevant language in this city. 71.156.15.164 (talk) 00:25, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

It's not all that silly. The Spanish language may not be relevant in Antwerp (nor is French, which is spoken in a different part of Belgium), but Spanish rule plays a crucial role in the history of the city. (Antwerp remained Spanish during the Dutch revolt, see the articles introduction.) Jaho (talk) 15:49, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

To give an example of why it's not silly, the man who designed the cathedral at Granada in Andalucia (Spain), trained with the St. Lucas guild in Antwerp. There was an enormous exchange of art and culture between the Southern Netherlands and Spain during the reigns of Charles V and Philip II. Any serious student of art history would need to know that Amberes means Antwerp. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 23:13, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I think the French "Sinjeur" is more likely source. The Spanish form is related, but not the direct relation. Court in the Netherlands was French, even in Habsburg (Charles V and Philips II) times. 88.159.71.34 (talk) 20:50, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Why does the population between 1545 and 1570 decline by 60,000?

Why does the population between 1545 and 1570 decline by 60,000 as stated by the statistics in the article? 81.151.89.234 22:19, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Quote from the article: "On November 4, 1576, the Spanish soldiery plundered the town during what was called The Spanish Fury, and 6000 citizens were massacred. Eight hundred houses were burnt down, and over two millions sterling of damage was wrought in the town on that occasion."

Many of the people fled north to the Netherlands.

Rubens is a Baroque painter

It was claimed that Rubens is not a Baroque painter. This is quite bizarre. See e.g. here:

" The Flemish painter Peter Paul Rubens is considered the most important artist of the 17th century, whose style became an international definition of the animated, exuberantly sensuous aspects of baroque painting. "

Or here:

" Estilo: Barroco Centroeuropeo"

Or finally:

"Flemish painter who was the greatest exponent of Baroque painting's dynamism, vitality, and sensuous exuberance."

I think we can safely conclude that Rubens was a baroque painter ;-) Fram 14:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

First Skyscrapper in Europe?

Is it true, that the "Farmers tower" in Antwerp was the first skyscrapper in europe? Maybe an interesting information!?--Manfreeed 19:34, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

• This is true, according to emporis: http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=kbctower-antwerp-belgium

the official english name is "KBC Tower" 194.78.199.56 15:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you paid by KBC?

Why include the French name at all?

I don't see why people who read this article in English should be given the French, Spanish, or, why not, Italian, Portuguese and Latin names of this city in the first place.

This article is in English, and the city of Antwerp is Dutch-speaking. It makes sense to use the English name Antwerp; and it is essential to state that the official name is Antwerpen. People who want to look for further information will need that name?. But to include the French name of the city might lead people to thinking that the French name is also official, and therefore useful for further research. This is especially the case with Belgian towns, as many foreigners tend to believe that Belgium is French-speaking, or has a French-speaking majority, or uses French as its national official language. None of this is actually true.

Leaving out the French (and Spanish) name would also bring the articles about Dutch-speaking places more in correlation with other articles on the English version of Wikipedia. The articles on London and Scotland do not state the French and German names. The articles on Geneva and Milan do not include the German names for these cities. And the articles on French-speaking provinces in Wallonia don't contain the Dutch names of "Mons" and "Hainaut". So why should we make an exception for Dutch places? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.197.33.214 (talk) 18:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC).

To state that the French name "Anvers" is not official (????) is slightly erroneous: it may not be officially used within the municipality, but the nation of Belgium is officially bilingual (!!!!), and so the central Belgian government must refer to it both in Dutch and French. Furthermore, the Spanish name is historically significant, since Belgium was part of the Spanish Netherlands some four hundred years ago. Djcartwright 23:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

And as for the reverse: at least Namur (city) lists "Namen" as the Dutch language version in the intro. I don't think it is unreasonable for major Belgian cities to list both versions, as long as the local name comes first, and the text explains explicitly or omplicitly which language is the local language. Fram 20:04, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

The introduction to Brussels has the city's German name! French is not a foreign language in Belgium, I don't see why all cities shouldn't have both versions. It's easy enough to tell from the rest of the article what the local language is.GSTQ 04:59, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Let me say that I am in favour of including the Spanish and French names of the city. Both Amberes and Anvers have seen considerable historic use and it is useful to make it clear that these different names all refer to the same place. Obviously there are those who wish to expunge all trace of the past but this won't do. Augusta2 00:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Diamonds

Isnt the place famouse for diamond trade? Cacophony 03:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Antwerp is the only city in the world with four diamond bourses, three for gemstones and one for boart. Augusta2 00:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Should this information be included in the article? I came here hoping to read something about the Antwerp diamond trade and was disappointed not to find anything. -Sarfa 05:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

It most definitely should, it's pretty much the only recent thing antwerp is renowned for.. i'll try to find some interesting articles about it and add some more info here.. Fisheke 08:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I came to find out about the diamonds too. WHY Antwerp, of all places? 2.25.46.254 (talk) 20:26, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Weapon crest

Are you sure that is the weapon crest/coat of arms? I live in Antwerp and have never seen it before, I think it's this: http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/5237/untitledoh2.png

Educational institutions

College is not an adequate translation of "hogeschool". The closest UK English offers is "polytechnical college" but since the transformation of all polytechnical colleges into universities in that country, one hesitates to use the term. Personally I would let "hogeschool" stand, but if it must be translated I suggest using "College of Further/Higher Education". It should be pointed out that the Flemish hogescholen have adopted the Ba(chelor)Ma(ster) structure. Augusta2 00:18, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't agree. A "Technical university" is +/- similar to a Hogeschool. Idem for a college. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.65.79.196 (talk) 18:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

It's a tricky subject. What we belgians call a university can be called a haute-école in france (for example), while a hogeschool is more like a université. While a college in the UK is often what we call a "faculteit" of a university. Polytechnical is also not to evident, considering that most of the courses in a hogeschool are nothing polytechnical (polytechnical in belgium means "engineering"). BUT.. i know of at least one hogeschool (GroepT) that officially uses the name "university college" in all their english communication. One possible solution is to just use the english translation the instituion itself uses? Fisheke (talk) 13:01, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Language

I don't want to start anything, but I just reverted an edit that changed all instances of "Dutch" language to "Flemish". I don't mind either way, and would accept it completely if discussing pronunciation, word choice, Flemish language literature and theatre and the "language on the street", but it seems to be a touchy enough point for some that I think consensus should be reached. Somewhat unrelated, I also reverted changing "Scheldt" to "Schelde". This is the English Wikpedia, so the English name of the river should be used. Ideas, anyone? --Stomme (talk) 06:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

The language is Dutch, not Flemish, so I agree with your reverts (also for Scheldt). Fram (talk) 09:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I also completely agree with Dutch instead of Flemish, which is officially just a dialect. Also the correct name of the river is Scheldt in English (and Escaut in French). Fisheke (talk) 01:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I just wanted there to be some documentation on the talk page in case the issue comes up again. --Stomme (talk) 01:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Two points. A woman I met in Antwerp told me that she was from the Netherlands, about fifty miles from Antwerp. Dutch and Flemish, as she called it, are mutually comprehensible, indeed almost identical, "but they can tell at once I'm Dutch", she said. A more jocular one, but perhaps worthy of inclusion in the article, is that there is a tradition that Adam and Eve spoke the Antwerp dialect in the Garden of Eden, and you come across one or two "Adam and Eve" and "Eden" bars and cafes because of this. Ausseagull (talk) 18:56, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Flemish and Dutch are significantly different. They sometimes don't even understand one another while speaking . Flemish and especially the local Antwerp dialect is incorrect Dutch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.196.67.45 (talk) 09:25, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

There are probably plenty of people from New England who would be immediately identified as Yankees in the South. Put a Brummie and a Geordie in the same room and they wouldn't find it easy to have a conversation, even though they both speak dialects of English. There are undoubtedly differences between Flemish and Dutch, if you define the one as the language spoken south of the border and the other as the language spoken north of the border. There are also plenty of differences between the language spoken in West Flanders and that spoken in the Limburg, nonetheless for serious philologists they are all Dutch. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 21:59, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

True enough, every local I've ever met in Flanders calls their language 'Nederlands', and as a fluent Dutch speaker, I would say that 'Flemish' is so close to Dutch that any misunderstanding is a result of accent, not dialect. Just like the above Brummie/Geordie example. 21stcenturypolitix (talk) 17:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Flemish and Dutch relate to each other somehow like British and American English, in some cases we in Belgium say things in a slightly different way than in the Netherlands and pronunciation is different. But no one is claiming to speak Flemish, like no one in the UK would claim to speak British English. The same case with French, which is different in Belgium, Switzerland, ... compared to France where they speak the 'official' French. We in the northern part of Belgium speak Dutch.

Nederlands is one language which has two (or more) dialects. However, English doesn't really have a word for this. The English word 'Dutch' relates to citizens of the Netherlands and 'Flemish' refers to citizens of Nederlands-speaking Belgium. Flemish is sometimes treated in English as a language, and sometimes as a dialect of Dutch, but this is not consistent. This difficulty is compounded by the fact that in English the word 'Holland' is used to refer to the whole of the Netherlands, whereas in Dutch it only refers to the provinces of North and South Holland, and in English the word 'Netherlands' is sometimes used (especially historically) as a synonym for 'Low Countries', which is the Netherlands and Flanders.

The whole article as it stands has a very strong Dutch (or Flemish) accent, and needs a bit of rewriting to put it into standard English. The question of Dutch or Flemish isn't really solvable in this article, because it represents a linguistic issue which the English-speaking world isn't aware of. Martin Turner (talk) 19:38, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Just noting that Flemish has grammatical differences to Dutch which are seen as officially correct in Belgium. When I was in Highschool we where thought Flemish is an official language. It's also worth noting that Dutch and Flemiush grammatical academics change insignificant rules every 1 or 2 years, it's hard to keep track of it after leaving Highschool. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.123.31.245 (talk) 12:28, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

St. Anna's Tunnel

I was wondering where the St. Anna's Tunnel is mentioned in this article. It does not seem to be. I just uploaded a photo on wikicommons that can be found |here if somebody wants to use it. Meanwhile, if I get down to searching for the article on this tunnel and dont find one, I will write it up. Prashanthns (talk) 20:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Infobox

How is the infobox working for this article? I couldn't find out how to update the population figure.--Pjred (talk) 07:21, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Jews

"Antwerp has an extensive network of synagogues, shops, schools and organizations, within the Machsike Hadas community."

Suppose the meaning of this sentence might be conciderably more clear, if before "shops, etc." the words "exclusively Jewish" would be inserted. VKing (talk) 09:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Antwerp Massive

I've heard the phrase "Antwerp Massive" in some music I listen to; looking it up it seems a reggae and dancehall movement based in Antwerp. So why no mention in the article of this? Am I mistaken somewhere? Dragosian (talk) 10:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

You're not mistaken, it is just not notable at all. We don't list every shop, movement, group, band, artist, gallery, venue, festival, ... in Antwerp, only the truly notable ones. Fram (talk) 11:16, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Righty o. That's fair. 114.76.74.129 (talk) 12:11, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

WW1

Antwerp and the surrounding areas had a huge importance in the beginnings of WWI with British troops committed in attempts to bolster Belgian defenses. Eventually they were overwhelmed, or at least fell back, leaving Germany open to even the possibility of invading Britain. Yet I do not see any mention of this on the page. If I am looking at the wrong page or something, my bad, so could an admin please tell me so? Thanks. Uberlieder (talk) 23:08, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Choosing a likely subtopic, alert the Military History WikiProject with a link to this Talk page and your query. -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Unusable link

At the foot of this entry is the external website "Tourism Antwerp" which links to www.visitantwerp.be. When I click this link I am prompted for a user name and password. I therefore feel that this link should be removed as per WP:ELNO. Careful With That Axe, Eugene ^Hello... 16:21, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Additional: Antwerp timeline links in reference section are broken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.118.88.157 (talk) 06:39, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Skippers

Perhaps the article should mention the red-light district, "The Quarter of the Skippers". It's on the tourist trail, but I only saw it in the day time and it was rather drab. Someone got it wrong, too - "the Quarter of the Kippers", they called it. Ausseagull (talk) 19:01, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Should there be a heading on the economy?

In order to understand monetary issues there? Iwanttoeditthissh (talk) 07:19, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

first stock exchange

in 1555 there was the the begining of joint stock companies and things culminating in dutch east india company in the 1600's decade. in my 1970 world enclycledpia i used to have in it said mentioning of this. 76.253.142.197 (talk) 22:00, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Photos

A couple of the photos are duplicated and should be consolidated.Mwinog2777 (talk) 17:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Museum Aan de Stroom Maurice van Bruggen.JPG Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Museum Aan de Stroom Maurice van Bruggen.JPG, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:10, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

I can't see why it should be deleted. It has been released for public use by the owner, see the page. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 22:02, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

The problem is not with the picture (which was uploaded to commons under GFDL), but with the architectural copyrights of the building. In Belgium, images of buildings are considered derivative works of the building itself. A similar problem exists with the atomium in Brussels, and consequently you can't upload images of that building to commons. Well, I'm not a lawyer, but that's what I make of it. Jaho (talk) 16:15, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Or as the template on the deleted page summarizes it: Image is of a modern building in Antwerp, Belgium. There is no freedom of panorama (FOP) in Belgium. (See also Commons:Freedom of panorama and Commons:Freedom of panorama#Belgium.) Jaho (talk) 23:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Removed reference to the deleted image from the article now. Jaho (talk) 00:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Removing refimprove tag

The article carries the template {This article needs additional citations for verification} since october 2011. Some sections certainly should have additional references, but they're separately tagged (also since october 2011). The article as a whole has (as of this writing) 38 references, and many sections are adequately referenced. I'm removing the {refimprove} tag from the article's heading, as I feel it's redundant and/or no longer needed. Jaho (talk) 00:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Unclear text:

In the lede, the sentence "However the Brussels-Capital Region is considered as the largest Belgian city internationally" appears. I realize that the writer is probably not a native English speaker, and I'm happy to edit the sentence, I just can't figure out what it's supposed to mean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TCSaint (talk • contribs) 16:21, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Severed hands of dead men "without issue"

"In favour of this folk etymology is the fact that hand-cutting was indeed practised in Europe; the right hand of a man who died without issue was cut off and sent to the feudal lord as proof of main-morte"

I believe this section deserves at least a "citation needed", or perhaps should be removed entirely.

Closure of Scheldt

"The recognition of the independence of the United Provinces by the Treaty of Münster in 1648 stipulated that the Scheldt should be closed to navigation"

According to "Chambers Dictionary of World History" this was a confirmation of what had been the case since after the fall of Antwerp to the Spanish in 1588, but I can't find a precise date.Ledmatt (talk) 11:16, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Railway connection to Charleroi Airport

Under the air section in transportation, it is claimed that there is a direct train connection between Antwerp and Charleroi. I believe this statement should be emitted, as this is not of additional value. This phrases suggests that the train goes directly to the airport, which is not the case. Brussels South Airport is not reachable by train. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1810:3819:1500:68FA:6B8:CD23:9B62 (talk) 20:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

fortifications

I propose to take the section about the fortifications into a separate lemma and leave only a sumary in the ANtwerp page --DerekvG (talk) 14:29, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

disputed population figure 1568

I just removed following text with literature refences:

by 1560s with some 200,000 people.

and a repeat mention of these same figures and refernces further down in the text. These quotes are disputed, and for good reason, although the editor did a good job mentioning the sources, (s)he interpreted the qoutes wrong and the text doesn't reflect the content of the source--DerekvG (talk) 10:03, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Good job, see also the discussion on User talk:Caribounomade's talk page. They mention some other interesting sources - the demographics section should be rewritten to be more consistent.--Lemnaminor (talk) 13:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

indeed I will get those refences on the page --DerekvG (talk) 15:44, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

References

Timeline of Antwerp

What is missing from the city timeline? Please add relevant content. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 10:17, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Naming theories

@User:Iblardi I think that a new article should be made about the origins of the name of Antwerp. In Antwerp itself a small paragraph should remain for the different theories, the nw article can then describe in depth each theory. 109.131.121.244 (talk) 23:40, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

But that would make the etymology of the name seem much more problematic and controversial than it actually is. The theory that Antwerpen was derived from anda + werpum is the only one mentioned in the WNT ([1]), the VMNW ([2]), and Gysseling’s Toponymisch Woordenboek ([3]), and Michiels’ self-published work apparently lacks academic credibility ([4]). Note that Middle Dutch also had a noun antwerp with the same meaning (see here and here). Iblardi (talk) 17:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't quite agree with the statement that, the origins of the name should not be problematic, doing futher research I found that

a) that Michiels' theory might be problematic because it might have been plagiarised form a MA-thesis of Hans Rombaut, Historian

b) on the basis of W. van Osta's comments only the toponimical society disregards Michiels theory , and reveal a dispute between germnaists and classicists

c) archeological societies don't discard michiels or rombauts theory, which menas there is more then one theory based on archelogical evidence

Moreover the "tegenwerp" theory , has itś own flaws and the fact that werf (wharf in english) as a mooring place for ships function of the "werf" in the 10th century enceinte makes that theory also worth mentioning, and I think the insights provided by earlier scholars (going back to Prims) merit to be exposed to the reader,

Both Rombout and Michiels argue correctly based on Warmenbol and his sources that the terp was not inhabited between the 3rd and 9th century. which also merits mentioning , the gallo roman 2nd century settelemnt and the 8th century Andoverpia destroyed by the Vikings might not be in the location of the steen ( 10 th century keep) after the destruction the andoverpians could have rebuild a city on the 10th century location

That is why i propose to write a sperate article about the menaing of the name documenting both the folkloric legend(s) and the different scientific theories with their sources (as per wikipedia policy). The fact that GTB seems like the only source, looks pretty biased as its a ducth linguistic source about a belgian linguistic and archeological subject. 109.131.121.244 (talk) 22:31, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I think you would be giving those other theories undue weight. I don't see much evidence of a dispute between Classicists and Germanists. Both authors appear to be outliers. Rombaut's work is as heavily criticised as that of Michiels, even to the point of being called 'unscientific'. See [5] and [6].

Also, I don't see why the standard dictionaries would be biased. The GTB is co-financed by the Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap ([7]) and the INL is a Dutch-Flemish research institute ([8]). Gysseling, of course, is Flemish. Iblardi (talk) 07:11, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

the fact that itś finance by an official institution doesn't make it less biased, as a matter of fact it even supports that bias, so is the "taalunie" whose sole purpose is to commit an offical cultural genocide on the flemish dialects, and dialectic and lingusitic heritage. especially dictionaries in dutch are very biased and holland-centred (iḿ talking about the province not the country), they are very dismissive and condescending about anything remotely un-hollandisch, they are promoting the "eenheidsworst" unifomity and they abhor any form of diversity.

I was looking at the books by Gysseling though yopur link i found his dictionay very interesting ( strange that itś on a totally different ? privately sponsored perhaps? website , telling fact or just coincidence?)

Are there any othee works where his theory/reasoning about how Gysseling came at this entry for Antwerp and (bibliographic reference) can be found (PS i have to order any books to be delivered to my house i cannot go to the library myslef) 109.131.121.244 (talk) 12:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

BTW "unscientific" is a characterisation by one proponenet about the theory of its opponents when he has no arguments to disprove his opponents theory unequivocably, and neither has the prove to support his own theory also unequivocably. so as far as "undue attention" is concerned until any theory is proven beyond reasonable doubt , both are a mere matter of "belief" and shoudl get the same undue attention, therefore I woudl liek to document both the celtic and germanic theories , and any other theory that might come along in accordance with wikipedia policy about NeutralPOV.109.131.121.244 (talk) 12:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

OK, but I already gave you my opinion. I disagree with you, for the reasons stated above. Iblardi (talk) 14:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Are there any other books you can refer me to , where Gysseling theory/reasoning about how he came at this conclusion for the Antwerp entry in his dictionary? (bibliographic reference) (PS i have to order any library books to be delivered to my house i cannot go to the library myslef)? --109.131.121.244 (talk) 15:44, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Shoudl your disagreement prevent me from startign this separate article ? will you delete it ? or how are we going to handle this ? --109.131.121.244 (talk) 15:44, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

The whole Origin of the name section as edited by 109.131.121.244 is undue weight. I have removed the crazy section headings that caused the table of contents to take up more than one full screen, but the section is still far too lengthy. The origin of the name is of passing interest, but not enough to take up so much of this article, still less an article of its own. I haven't examined it closely enough to see how much of it is original research, but I suspect that somebody with reasonable knowledge of Antwerp and its history would be able to trim it down to something that is concise, balanced, informative and properly sourced. Scolaire (talk) 14:22, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

As it turned out, all of 109.131.121.244's edits were word-for-word translations from two web pages. I have simply reverted them as copyvio. Scolaire (talk) 09:16, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

read Scolaire : his evaluation of COPYVIO is imho very broad and liberal and therefore gratuitous, Translations are by definition paraphrases and if sourced therefore not copyvio. I suspect you don't speak dutch either (you most probably rely on google translate or similar on line tool)

Secondly you clearly do not understand what you are talking about because you changed a phrase which turned the 19th century legend as a valid origine of the city name.

Last but not least you deleted one of two theories , both of which are equally unsubstantiated theory because they are based on competing linguistic insights. Finally only one ( the deleted theory) incorporates and explains and incorporates the archeological finds made in the last 200 years whereas the the competing theory does not include that evidence. Iḿ not saying that either theory is correct or even close to the truth, both theories are as close as they can get to the historical and scientific insights currently available, as they are equally doubtful NPOV demands that both points of view should be respresented. which was what the previous discussion was all about.

BTW in you summaries you make derogatory comment about the source being a or more websites, itś not becasue itś a website that it cannot be made by the scholars and contain the information they published elsewhere, clearly you didn't get that.

Your edits result imho in an infringement on NPOV in the article now favours of one theory and a allows a myth to be valid origine. --DerekvG (talk) 12:15, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what "broad", "liberal" or "gratuitous" mean in this context, but I can tell you that a close paraphrase – especially of the length of the text that was added here – is just as much a violation of copyright as a direct copy-and-paste, so it is nonsense to say that the fact that it was a translation makes it okay. I don't know what you mean by "derogatory comment" in my edit summaries, either. I certainly never suggested that online sources could not be reliable sources. All I did was to give the url of the copyright pages that had been translated word for word. As regards NPOV, that policy states that NPOV "means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Now, 1,200 words on one theory against 300 words on every other theory (I count three) is not proportionate in any language. I don't claim any expertise at all in this subject, so I'll leave it to others to discuss how much weight should be given to Alfred Michiels's theory, but it would help your cause immensely if you could summarise it in 100 words here on the talk page for the consideration of other editors. Scolaire (talk) 22:22, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

@User:Scolaire I have pruned and reorganised the Origin of the name section to improve proportionality and eliminate unsourced material. The hand-throwing story is too colourful and too popular to leave out. --Frans Fowler (talk) 14:58, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

As I said, I have no expertise in the subject. Your edit looks good to me. Scolaire (talk) 19:23, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Antwerp/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I am the WikiProject Cities assessor of this article; if you would like some commentary, come and give me a holler. --Starstriker7(Say hior see my works) 12:44, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 12:44, 19 September 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 08:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Geography section

I noticed such a section is missing. LibStar (talk) 03:04, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Multicultural ranking

The early phrase "...is the world's second most multi-cultural city (after Amsterdam)" is something I was trying to verify. The references are to a news page and a tourism site, but neither seem to have a proper justification for the assertion - the statements do appear in the refs, but as in-passing comments. I have tried to find a source for "most multi-cultural city" which ranks Ams first and Antwerp second, and can't find one. I was hoping to improve the page by giving a more definitive/scientific reference. I do not think the linked references are good enough to back-up the claim. (NB: I have NOT edited the page). Jonknox (talk) 14:17, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Antwerp Jain Mandir.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 06:36, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

"The Portuguese merchants left in 1549"

Why did the Portuguese merchants leave in 1549? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DlronW (talk • contribs) 02:04, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Antwerp hands confectionery

I've found a couple of references (and several tweets & blogs) which claim that the Antwerpse Handjes delicacy represent the hands which were cut from Congolese nationals who were disfigured or murdered during Leopold II's occupation. I'm not sure how reliable the sources are, so I'm hesitant to add anything to the local products section. Does anyone have anything reliable to support or refute the claims that the history of these products is connected to what happened in the Congo Free State? ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 18:19, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

References

The hand as a symbol of the city of Antwerp predates the Leopold's Congo-era and therefore has no connection to the atrocities happening in the late 19th century. To link the two is historical revisionism. The cookies refer to the mythical story about the creation of the city: "Druon Antigoon and the giant Brabo". The hand as a symbol of the city has been present in the city coat of arms since 1239! The claim that it had something to do with the colonial period was noted and immediately unanimously refuted, the issue died down quickly. Garfieldt (talk) 13:13, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Please review edits from DescheemaekerK and 188.189.230.16 (talk)

The edits look good to me but it is a new editor or editors and they are pretty sweeping changes. I don't have time to look at everything closely. —DIYeditor (talk) 08:20, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

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:

• Antwerp Central Station90.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:38, 29 March 2023 (UTC)