Talk:Maastricht

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Netherlands (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Dutch municipalities (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Cities (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject European Union (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Autonomous area?[edit]

I seem to recall there was an area near the present German-Dutch-Belgian junction that was forgotten by the Congress of Vienna and thus was not assigned to any state until the treaties after 1918. Was it Maastrict? If not where was it and what was it called? --StanZegel 07:07, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

No, it was Neutral Moresnet, near the Dutch-Belgian-German three-country border point, and between the Belgian village of Moresnet and the Dutch village of Vaals. Some 5,000 people lived there by 1900 and it was a refuge for free-thinkers. Maastricht has been in the Netherlands ever since 1815 and as an enclave within Belgian area from 1830-1839.--Caesarion 14:25, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Photograph[edit]

The photograph of the Maasticht skyline [1] is a nice photograph, but not very illustrative of Maastricht. The skyline-idea could work quite well, though. Maybe next time I'm in town I'll take one. DirkvdM 19:04, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Verify[edit]

Could someone verify if anything in Berg en Terblijt is correct, and if so, clean it up a bit. I don't know enough about it or the language to improve the article. Thanks - Taxman Talk 20:45, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Disambiguation?[edit]

I think it would be useful to have one of those bars at the top of the page that read: "This article refers to the city of Maastricht. For the political treaty, click here." [That's how I got to this page, lol] I don't know how to set that up, though, could someone help me out? Nicolasdz 11:47, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Done. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Coat of Arms Maastricht.gif[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Coat of Arms Maastricht.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:25, 2 June 2007 (UTC)


>> I think this is fixed now, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.156.86.112 (talk) 12:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Recent Vandalism[edit]

This article has been vandalised by RayleneWauda; it could also simply be mistakes made by him/her as a newcomer. The point is that the article has been partially deleted. Since I'm not really THE specialist on undoing these type of things I could use some help. Thank you LightPhoenix 15:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, "85.146.180.205" for your help! LightPhoenix 20:47, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

2 Euro-tops[edit]

The following text has been reverted without any argumentation on 9-19 by an anonymus.

"As a matter of fact it was the initial version, that was signed here; the definite version was signed in Dublin. By the way another European Top Conference had been held in this town some 6 years earlier. It is known to be the one, that ended in as good as all present statesmen and -women having been affected with the Salmonella bacterium, which gave them the opportunity to frequently found out, how good the locally produced toilets of a more or less well known brand function."

Like to know, what was the argumantation to remove this information? James Blond 04:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Airplane noise[edit]

When some thirty years ago there were protests from villages in it's direct neighbourhood against the planned developement of a very small air-port at Beek, to a bigger one, in Maastricht, which town is nearby, but in a distance, where it doesn't have any noise problems, according to a regional newspaper, there were reactions like: "If the citizens of Maastricht in this way can get an opportunity to travel to Mallorca directly (without first having to travel to Schiphol), than of course protests from a farmersvillage like Ulestraten can not be regarded to be of any importance". According to this (Dutch) website, [2] by now the inhabitants of Maastricht, are more and more concerned about the developement of the air-port at the (small) village Bierset (Belgium) to "another Schiphol". According to local protestgroups, airplanes are "not only bad for health of inhabitants of surrounding places, but also polluting and contributing to the greenhouse-effect". In case insiders can confirm, that this item has been in newspapers and/or other media already, so that sources are available, it could be mentioned in this acticle as well. James Blond —Preceding comment was added at 11:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC) You know, I never see or hear airplanes, but early, really early every morning a plan passes over my apartment. Often loud enough to wake me up. So, yeah, it bugs me! Of course, that qualifies as "original research". 84.198.11.132 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Demographics[edit]

I think there should be a section on Maastricht's straqnge demographics. Because it's such a student town, there are thousands of kids (mostly 20 to 25, they start late around here), especially in the inner city. In my neighborhood, Buitenwijk Zuid-West, there are lots of old people. I'd say mostly over 60. Few children in the whole city, and few middle-aged. Thing is, I don't have any reliable source. Just my observation. Worth looking into? The Nederlandse wiki committee calls this article a "Start" after all, so it seems more information would be good.

History[edit]

In the History section, subsection "Part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands", it reads "despite being geographically and culturally closer to Belgium". The geographical statement seems obvious, but how is the cultural argument supported? It seems a rather vague statement to make, so unless it can be supported by evidence I suggest to change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.156.86.112 (talk) 13:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Oldest City[edit]

Maastricht is not the oldest city of the Netherlands. The discussions on this subject concluded a couple of years ago that Nijmegen is the oldest city in the Netherlands. --Unknown

Discussions like this never conclude. It depends a lot on what you mean by "city" and whether the present-day city is truely a continuation of the ancient settlement. --Unknown
Discussions indeed came to no conclusion, but it is clear what the arguments are. Nijmegen was the first with Roman city rights; Maastricht the first with Medieval city rights. I incorporated this in the article. Piotr Kapretski 13:59, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Maastricht is the oldest city and not else! Nijmegen maybe got the Roman city rights title first, but Maastricht was founded much earlier and was a city much earlier! --Unknown
By the way; this is an endless discussion in the Netherlands ;-) --Unknown
This discussion is semi-resolved. Nijmegen is currently (according to the research currently done) widely considered the oldest city. Yes, Maastricht has been settled at least a few hundred years longer but there are other settlements that might have been settled even longer. Roman city rights, a degree of self-governance and city allure are the commonly used criteria in this discussion and in that respect Nijmegen has the most solid claim. See also the Dutch article: nl:Oudste stad van Nederland.

ya, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.226.239.158 (talk) 16:22, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

According to that article the town of Voorburg is much older as a settlement than M. So in that sence M. cannot be the oldest city. In the sence of "first city" it cannot be either, because that clearly is Nijm. Sorry, but more than "one of the three oldest cities of the Neth.", seems to be out of reach. VKing (talk) 12:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Caves[edit]

We really, really need an article on the Grotten Sint-Pietersberg. They are a major attraction of the city and contain some of its (and indeed Europe's) most interesting history. I do not have all the knowledge to write this, but someone ought to. Amber388 (talk) 05:26, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Cannabis[edit]

This is notable event which ought be included:

http://www.aolnews.com/article/dutch-city-gets-ok-to-ban-tourists-from-marijuana-cafes/19557202 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.210.148 (talk) 15:31, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

accuracy of one of the articles[edit]

The Guardian article about the bookshop in the Dominicanen Kirk. It does not proclaim it the most beautiful book shop in the world. It actually lists ten bookshops "considered to be the fairest of them all", so it should read one of the top ten most beautiful bookshops ... If you read the other write ups you see they are not in any particular order.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2008/jan/11/bestukbookshops — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spin007drift (talkcontribs) 21:21, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Official name is not Matztricht[edit]

I just changed the official name and native name of the city from Matztricht and Matztreech respectively to Maastricht and Mestreech. I live in Maastricht and my family speaks Mesteechs, and I can assure you that neither of these names begins with 'Matz'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.120.68.148 (talk) 14:29, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Importance rating on WikiProject Cities[edit]

It appears that this article ought to be ′upgraded′ to Mid-importance rather than low, seeing as it is the provincial capital (and perhaps also because of the Treaty of Maastricht and the fact that it is one of the oldest and most touristic cities in the Netherlands). Also, cities like 's-Hertogenbosch and Arnhem are classified as such, despite the fact that their population is also below 200,000.Jeroenm (talk) 09:51, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Language[edit]

French ... part of secondary school curricula, German ... part of secondary school curricula, English ... important language in education ... (by certain part of the population) used as lingua franca ... mandatory subject in Dutch elementary and secondary schools... Honestly, does all this need to be included in this article? This pretty much goes for the entire country. The only really notable parts in this section are the Maastricht dialect and the fact that it has once (long, long ago) been a French speaking city. PPP (talk) 18:46, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

The whole section seems to be a good candidate for rewriting in a proper text form rather than a bulleted list. I agree that the school curriculum does not need a place in this article. CRwikiCA talk 19:10, 18 August 2013 (UTC)