Jump to content

Talk:Belgium: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 182: Line 182:
:::The main issue is not at calculating the percentages of people who identify as Wallon of Flemish rather the incorrrect usage of the term "ethnic groups". [[Special:Contributions/188.148.143.116|188.148.143.116]] ([[User talk:188.148.143.116|talk]]) 11:31, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
:::The main issue is not at calculating the percentages of people who identify as Wallon of Flemish rather the incorrrect usage of the term "ethnic groups". [[Special:Contributions/188.148.143.116|188.148.143.116]] ([[User talk:188.148.143.116|talk]]) 11:31, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
::::So should we remove it?--[[User:Andrew Lancaster|Andrew Lancaster]] ([[User talk:Andrew Lancaster|talk]]) 19:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
::::So should we remove it?--[[User:Andrew Lancaster|Andrew Lancaster]] ([[User talk:Andrew Lancaster|talk]]) 19:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
:::::I propose something in the following style:
:::::Ethnic groups 66.6% Belgians
:::::-Flemish
:::::-Wallons
:::::-Others
:::::33.4% Others [[Special:Contributions/188.148.143.116|188.148.143.116]] ([[User talk:188.148.143.116|talk]]) 08:54, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:54, 1 March 2023

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

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

Template:Vital 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


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 ~~

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.

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2022 (2)

Change total nominal GDP from $609,887 billion to $609.887 billion. 2601:2C2:980:6710:912E:F3A:F57D:A00C (talk) 22:33, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Kpgjhpjm 06:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is not related to sources. It's a formatting issue. $609,887 billion implies a total GDP of $609887 billion which doesn't make any sense. I am pretty sure what was meant was $609.887 billion. Also look at the total PPP GDP which is written as $715.658 billion which does seem to be correct. 64.209.89.208 (talk) 13:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This issue has been taken care of by Aidan9382 in the section immediately below this one. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:21, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 June 2022

In the “Capital and largest city” section of the infobox, can you change “Brussels” to “City of Brussels”? Brussels in the infobox is a region. 2605:8D80:404:8E9F:8132:B6DD:8428:4FCA (talk) 00:23, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RudolfRed (talk) 03:48, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 October 2022

"continued to interact with the their neighbours" 81.103.38.4 (talk) 09:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done – Thanks! Favonian (talk) 09:52, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good

Good — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.116.49.73 (talk) 00:34, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2023

Could the "ethnic groups" section be changed from "belgians" to wallons and flemish? Belgian is not an ethnic group. Maybe include all three with flemish and wallons as subgroups of belgian. 188.148.143.116 (talk) 19:20, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How would you source this? This is a sensitive question of course, but it is partly sensitive because it is tricky to work out the practicality. Identity, including ethnic identity, is in reality something connected to what people perceive about themselves and others. This can be pretty complicated. As much as people on the internet want to tell people how identity should work based on language, it doesn't. In fact even language surveys can be difficult in Belgium. (See Voeren.) So we need a clear way to measure this, and in Belgium this is not simple. Do all Belgians say that they are primarily either Flemish or Walloon? (No.) Which statistics exist, and are they clear and uncontroversial? (You could propose to simply use the statistics of who resides in each of the states? But then what do you do with Brussels? Are state populations really ethnicity surveys?) What do we do with people who say they are primarily Belgian? (Tell them they are mistaken?) --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:33, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point, and you make a compelling case. However, ethnicity and nationality are not the same. Take Russia for example. The nationality every citizen is russian of course but that doesn't mean that every citizen is ethnically russian. A large part of the population have other ethnicities that are not even related to russian/slavs; the many turkic ethnic groups for example. My main point is not to divide Belgium into two distinct groups but rather the article the use the term ethnic groups correctly 188.148.143.116 (talk) 19:42, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well we could remove that entry in the infobox, but perhaps someone else knows of a better approach.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:36, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Surely the relevant question is whether reliable sources describe Walloons and Flemings as ethnic groups. From a quick search, it appears that many do, e.g. this. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:11, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is one relevant question, but it does not address the practical question of what to do as Wikipedia editors in this case. Are there reliable (and uncontroversial) statistics which report the numbers of people who are Flemish OR Walloon (and some however exclude the possibility of being both)? Flemish/Walloon ethnicity, if these concepts mean anything worth reporting separately, are not the same as speaking Dutch/French, or living in a Dutch/French speaking area. These are things we already report. Are there statistics which make such distinctions, and do not simply equate these ethnicities with residency or primary language?
A second question this discussion raises is whether we are sure that being Belgian is not a possible "ethnicity". I think it is a way that people identify themselves. Keep in mind that this is not a simple topic. From an academic point of view the idea of language-based ethnicities, and people having to belong to one and only one such group whether they like it or not, is a bit problematic to say the least. From a historical point of view the division of Belgians into northern and southern linguistic groups is a quite recent and politically-decided thing. It is not universally accepted. If we find no distinct ethnicity statistics, as opposed to political/residency statistics, then I think we should report political/residency statistics for what they are and not confuse the issue.
Maybe the intention of this statistic is that someone wanted to report the statistics for people who don't have ancestry in the region? This is a typical distinction made in Flanders, using terms such as "migration background" or "allochtoon". However it is also quite problematic if we are trying to be encyclopedic, and I again wonder what statistics exist. In everyday speech these terms are often applied to native-born Belgian citizens, but they tend NOT to be applied to families with "white" ancestry, such as "ex-pats" from countries like the USA, or people with ancestry in neighbouring EU countries. These ways in which people popularly distinguish their groups from other groups are clearly not very scientific. The question of ethnicity in Belgium could probably be handled in a special discussion in the body of the article, or perhaps better in a special article, but do not seem suitable for an infobox, which should contain very clear and simple information?
But again, it depends what sources can be found.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 10:35, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, sorry, I was just thinking about the labels, not associated population percentages. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:11, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not done for now Per the above discussion this request is not specific enough to be implemented as is. Therefore I am marking the request as "answered". GiovanniSidwell (talk) 21:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion has raised a question about whether we should be saying things about ethnicity (as opposed to easier topics like language and political districts) while we have apparently not really got strong sourcing for that.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The main issue is not at calculating the percentages of people who identify as Wallon of Flemish rather the incorrrect usage of the term "ethnic groups". 188.148.143.116 (talk) 11:31, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So should we remove it?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I propose something in the following style:
Ethnic groups 66.6% Belgians
-Flemish
-Wallons
-Others
33.4% Others 188.148.143.116 (talk) 08:54, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]