This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium 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.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
This article has been marked as needing an infobox.
A fact from Caesarsboom appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 10 September 2008, and was viewed approximately 4,600 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Is "draughts board" mislinked here, linking to draft beer and bar counter? Isn't the Damberd, a name resulting from an ancient signboard, actually a heraldic badge, in heraldic terms "checky"? Signboards, familiar from inns and pubs, identified most urban houses in the Low Countries before house-numbering was instituted.--Wetman (talk) 18:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)Reply
The www.virtualtourist.com reference translates Damberd as "Draught-Board" but the links, which were my interpretation, have been removed. Would it be okay to link "Draught" to "Draught beer" and "Board" to "Sign"? Boston (talk) 16:18, 7 September 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Unless I'm missing something, the inclusion of "quotes" from some random tourist/cyclist stating that "it's very old" and "the oldest looking yew I've ever seen" are really not encyclopaedicly appropriate quotes or references. Just because some random tourist thinks the tree is old doesn't make it worth including. If the quoted person were a historian or a botanist or otherwise qualified to comment on the age of the tree, I could see a place. But otherwise it's just cruft and doesn't add anything to the article. Guliolopez (talk) 21:14, 22 September 2008 (UTC)Reply
