Talk:German-speaking Community of Belgium

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

talk[edit]

Is Eupen-Malmedy another name for East Cantons? -- Dissident 02:30, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Eupen-Malmedy is the term used by the German nationalist movement to describe the lands lost to Belgium after WWI. The vast majority were German speaking but some were French. It is a former region of the Prussian Rheinland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.84.182.95 (talk) 10:49, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, It isn't that are just names of some of the villages but I have another question. Are you shure it always belonged to Germany berfore? I always tought it came to Belgian with the Belgian indipendance in 1830 from "de verenigde provinciën" and was given to Germany in 1839 with "het verdrag van de ... artikkelen". I'm not shure so I didn't wrote it on the mainpage but can someone check it out? Gitaarfreak(Dutch wikipedia)

"Are you sure that it always belonged to Germany before?"

I am not sure about the specific situation of the area before the French Revolution (although I believe that the Holy Roman Empire comprised most of what is now Belgium, anyway), but I am positive that the region formed part of Prussia as from the time of the Congress of Vienna (i.e. as from 1815) With regard to Malmedy and Waimes (the only francophone towns in the area) the Prussians were liberal enough to accept the use of French in administrative matters.--136.8.150.6 (talk) 09:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hullo even though your a 'random' folk like you are a credit to wiki. In Britain, Belgium and Luxemburg are unhealthly seen through Francophone eyes - imperialistic and dumbed-down, always good to come across more truthful takes on the Benelux, I have my suspions about both Waimes and Malmund - would reckon the state of French there was enhanced at the expense of its native German speakers, Wondering if the nature of French in administrative matters for the aforesaid towns was/is along the lines of how the French tongue is artificially imposed on administrative and educational matters in the nation of Luxemburg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.254.236 (talk) 19:06, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May we have a map indicating where the East Cantons are? -- Kaihsu 16:34, 2004 May 7 (UTC)

Interpretation[edit]

I'm not sure how to interpret The East Cantons were part of the Rhine Province, Prussia, Germany until 1920, from the article. Does it mean 'the Rhine province of Prussia in Germany', or were the East Cantons a part of Rhine Province at one stage, which was replaced with Prussia, and then later with Germany? or something totally different? Felix the Cassowary 30 June 2005 12:37 (UTC)

The Rhine Province belongs to Prussia and Prussia belongs to Germany. I guess this is a US idiom, they write things like "Seattle, Washington" all the time, meaning: Seattle, which is in Washington. --Chl 30 June 2005 14:06 (UTC)
Thanks! I've reworded the article so it's clear. (I'm familiar with that American idiom, but I don't think I've ever seen it before with more than two places so it started looking like a list.) Felix the Cassowary 1 July 2005 11:23 (UTC)

WALLONIA, FRANCE, GERMANY AND EUPEN

I suppose that if Wallonia joins France, Eupen and the German-speaking community will join Germany...that´s logical.

Not necessarily. The area of Sankt Vith has much more historical links with Luxembourg. Furthermore, the local dialict that is spoken there is very close to Luxembourgish language. --Lebob-BE (talk) 16:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If in fact Standard German is used as the official and legal language, whereas most or all people also speak dialect (Luxembourgian variant) this would pose a problem if this region left Belgium and Wallonia for Lux. The majority language by far in Lux. is French. What if any role does French have in the region? I understand the historical and cultural links but the links to Germany via standard German and history or just as strong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.212.69.87 (talk) 14:41, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The majority language by far in Lux. is French" What! no way is French the majority language in the nation of Luxemburg> French is artificially imposed in administrative, Educational, media, and other stuff 'on the ground' to give off an air 'Frenchness'. Basically needless imperialism to rub French egos and make Luxemburg seem like some kind of kosher 'Francophone' nation. My far the eveyday language of everyone is German or Luxemburg dialect. Your almost evil, the way you lied to folk whom don't know any bette. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.254.236 (talk) 19:19, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

huge blank space[edit]

Just a cosmetic problem,might want to fix it.Raspberrysnapple 04:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Include languages[edit]

I think it would be a good idea to add the different languages spoken in the area (Limburgish and Luxembourgish) - I was surprised, when I visited Eupen and St. Vith most people there don't speak Standard German, Limburgish seems to be somewhat closer to Dutch.Johnny2323 (talk) 02:27, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought they teach standard HIGH German in all the schools in the DGB? What you heard is local middle German dialect. I assume they can speak both like in many parts of middle and Upper Germany. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.85.101.45 (talk) 08:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name[edit]

Why is the Community named "German-speaking Community of Belgium", while the French and Flemish ones are named French Community of Belgium and Flemish Community? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dotfiret (talk • contribs) 08:53, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The word "German" refers to the German language, but it also refers to Germany. I think "German-speaking" has been chosen to emphasize the difference, Germany had quite a bad reputation in eastern Belgium, the area had been occupied by Germany during WWII and the result was the destruction of many cities and villages in the area - including many civilian casualties. Another possible explanation: The community comprises two separate territories (see the map in the article). Historically, the two territories belonged to the Duchy of Luxembourg and the Duchy of Limburg, people living there spoke (and many still speak) different dialects, which means the community is not as coherent as the French or Flemish community. Johnny2323 (talk) 02:55, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You get some very political correct people that refuse to speak of Germans. The Germans inhabiting the Eupen Malmedy area are also quite timid. I've been told that this was for reasons for intimidation by the Belgian occupation personnel. Not sure what that all included, I can just guess. --41.151.241.243 (talk) 13:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]


"You get some very political correct people that refuse to speak of Germans"

If true, this is not good guys, sounds like intimidation, brainwashing, minorities being leant-on - scared and wanting to please their new masters. It amazes me how Francophone imperialism gets away with it. Stuff like this should be used has an example and reported to the UN. You can tell it is a people driven to idiocy, in that these selfsame folk would not except it if Belgiums of Congolese roots took the same attitude towards French-speaking Belgiums.


"The community comprises two separate territories"

There is so much ongoing 'Frenchification' in Belgium but I don't think historically the separation (as seen on a map) is natural. I imagine lots of 'Francophone imperialism' by dint oversetting roadsigns, placenames, imposing of French in schools and so forth. Also, I reckon historical Francophone imperialism / their the Walloon overlords saw to it that the two sundry German-speaking communities borders were wrought asunder and no longer hit oneanother. Basic divide and rule. Indeed, would make a good living example on any wiki page on 'divide and rule' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.254.236 (talk) 19:31, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]


THE GERMAN-SPEAKING COMMUNITY HAS ALSO HAD ITS BORDERS ASUNDERED FROM THE BORDERS OF FLANDERS IN AND AROUND THE ABODES OF PLOMBIERES. CHECK IT OUT ON A MAP - IT'S SO OBVIOUS. IT'S ALL FRANCOPHONE GEO-POLITICS. THE FLEMISH-SPEAKERS AND GERMAN-SPEAKERS ARE SO MEEK IN ANSWERING FRANCOPHONE IMPERIALISM. EVEN IN BRITAIN BELGIUM/LUXEMBURG IS SEEN THROUGH FRANCOPHONE EYES, THATS COZ BRITAIN ALWAYS SAW THE DUTCHMAN AND GERMAN A MUCH MORE WORTHY/COMPETITOR COMPARED TO THE PRIMITIVE FRANCOPHONE SIZE-QUEEN IMPERIALISM.


"Why is the Community named "German-speaking Community of Belgium", while the French and Flemish ones are named French Community of Belgium and Flemish Community?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.254.236 (talk) 19:47, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I got a theory too,

1. the Francophone imperialists don't want to admit that the Flemish speak Dutch. They definately don't want to allow something like the 'Dutch-speaking community' for them, they belittle it by calling it Flemish - it bares less weight than truthfully calling it Dutch and it is also not so straightforward that the folk speaking something called Dutch rather than Flemish have links to Dutch-speakers in the Netherlands.

2. again another Francophone agenda in not using 'French community' over 'French speaking community' is to mislead folk into thinking French-speakers in Belgium are somehow Frenchmen. Basically a sly way of grooming 'public perception' in advance of any attempt at expansionism by the French state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.254.236 (talk) 19:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Differences between Dutch, German etc[edit]

"the difference line between German, Dutch, Luxembourgish and Limburgish is very slight since they are all part of the same dialect continuum"

Really? Let's take a look. Here is the first line of the Lord's Prayer in each. No way are German and Dutch and Luxembourgish so close as implied; Limburg dialect however is just a dialect of Dutch (the Wikipedia hive mind seems to think it's a 'language' LOL, the evidence doesn't bear this out.)

1. German: "Vater unser im Himmel, geheiligt werde dein Name; dein Reich komme; dein Wille geschehe, wie im Himmel so auf Erden"

2. Dutch: "Onze Vader die in de hemelen zijt, uw naam worde geheiligd; Uw rijk kome. Uw wil geschiede op aarde zoals in de hemel.

3. Luxembourgish: "Eise Papp am Himmel, däin Numm sief gehellégt. Däi Räich soll kommen, däi Wëll soll geschéien wéi am Himmel sou op der Äerd"

4. Limburgish: "Onze vader, die in de hemel zijt, uw naam worde geheiligd, uw rijk kome, uw wil geschiede op aarde zoals in de hemel."


..and in Frisian, which certainly a different language: " Us Heit, dy't yn de himelen is 

   jins namme wurde hillige.
   Jins keninkryk komme.
   Jins wollen barre,
   allyk yn 'e himel
   sa ek op ierde."
If you tried to present an evidence against the same dialect continuum than you missed the goal. Germans can read dutch if they concentrate on the text. Two words are difficult for me: "uw" needs a little thinking and "zoals" is something for guessing. The meaning of both words at least becomes clear from the context. I'm sure people from Aachen or Eupen know what "zoals" means. I live really far away from that region. Nankea (talk) 18:34, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have you thought that mayhap yourn aforesaid Lord Prayer versions are cherrypicked? Many folk out there are unawares, but there are many sundry living and old wordings and rewordings of the Lord's Prayer in English. I would reckon the same is true for Frise (yep, an sundry word for Frisian), Dutch, German and its offshoot Luxemburghish. --2A02:C7D:411:1600:226:8FF:FEDC:FD74 (talk) 03:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

German, Dutch and Luxemburgish are all part of a dialect continuum. That means that dialect speakers from both sides of the border can understand each other without any problems. However, especially on the German side, dialect speakers are becoming increasingly rare. And if you have grown up using and hearing only Standard German, you may be able to read Dutch or Luxemburgish texts with some effort, but you will not normally understand these languages when spoken.Yupanqui (talk) 08:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

Requested move 19 August 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved - no prejudice to immediate re-nomination by SMcCandlish for their proposal. DrStrauss talk 18:50, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]


German-speaking Community of Belgium → German-speaking community of Belgium – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. Tony (talk) 13:36, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason that "community" should be upcased. This is not titular, but generic. Per WP:MOSCAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term. Lowercase will match the formatting of similar article titles. Tony (talk) 13:36, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose per nom, one of the three Communities of Belgium, capitalised just like the Flemish Community and the French Community of Belgium. —Kusma (t·c) 11:48, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Eastern Belgium – "has its own parliament and government at Eupen" indicates this is a formal government entity, and that our article title is wrong, using a descriptor instead of a proper name. The WP:CONCISE name in English is Eastern Belgium, as the article's lead already provides, and is more WP:PRECISE because it clearly means the place not some cultural sense of "being Belgian and speaking German". The Francophone one should be moved to Wallonia-Brussels Federation, which is its actual name (in English); as that article itself says, "French community" [capitalization varies in the sources, so use lower case by default per MOS:CAPS] refers to Francophone Belgians. It is just applied to the region in a hand-wavey manner, and is insufficiently non-ambiguous to use as the article title. (Comparison: "French Canadians" is a common blanket term for the Quebequois and/or other French-speaking Canadians, but is similarly imprecise in both directions, since many people in Quebec, closer to Ontario, are native English speakers, and many Francophone Canadians do not live in Quebec, anyway.) The article presently at Flemish Community is indeterminate; it is conflating the political entity and the sense of the Flemish as a cultural "nation". Meanwhile it doesn't even provide the name in Flemish, unless it means to do so and is mislabeling it Dutch. [Without qualification, "Dutch" means the language spoken in the Netherlands, which is not Flemish (Vlaams, or "Flemish Dutch"), though related, like English and Scots are to each other.] Update: I checked, and the name given as "Dutch" is actually Flemish; have updated the article to use correct language terminology. It would probably make sense to find out what the majority of English-language sources use specifically for the political body (the jurisdiction) as distinct from the cultural sense of "Flemishness". Failing any sense of a clear WP:COMMONNAME that also passes WP:PRECISE – which "Felmish [c|C]ommunity" does not – go with the actual name of it in the Flemish language (cf. precedents like Irish Sinn Féin).  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  04:29, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    SMcCandlish, noted. Kusma, can you explain why any of those items needs a capital C? Are they political entities? If they're just language groups, the C should be c. Tony (talk)
    The article section "Communities, regions and language areas of Belgium#Schematic overview" suggests they're political entities, though I don't know how well-sourced it is. The main problem is that the specific terms being chosen in English here are innately ambiguous and should be avoided. We're not even using them consistently, and have articles at Flemish Community, French Community of Belgium, and German-speaking Community of Belgium; these are just vague efforts to translate, and collide with the socio-linguistic use of such labels. This is why I suggest using non-ambiguous proper names Respectively, these are Vlaamse Gemeenschap (which appears to have no common name in English under than the ambiguous one), Wallonia-Brussels Federation, and Eastern Belgium. They'll also be not consistent with each other, but this is typically the case with proper names; it is definitely not typically the case with our use of descriptive labels for three of the same sort of thing in the same country.

    The secondary problem is that the socio-linguistic concept of the Flemish "community" in Belgium, and the French and German counterparts, are legitimate encyclopedic topics in their own right, exactly like Spanish language in the United States (from a language-use perspective) and Hispanic and Latino Americans (from an ethno-cultural one). These should not be shoehorned into an article on administrative divisions of a country, any more than we relegate similar info into the articles New Mexico, Texas, California, Arizona, and Florida; they have WP:SUMMARY info on ethno-linguistic matters in them, but are not the central location for this information as it applies at the national scale.
     — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  21:54, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    The terms for these political entities are those used by the EU and the Belgian Government, see for example here. I don't see a good reason not to use official translations at this moment. —Kusma (t·c) 13:45, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The three communities of Belgium are constitutionally defined political entities. This should be obvious from the mention of a government, as well as from the referenced article Communities, regions and language areas of Belgium. If this is unknown to you, then quite frankly, you should inform yourselves and suggest clarification rather than impose corrections to topics you know little about. The entity in question is the "Duitstalige Gemeenschap / Communauté germanophone / Deutschsprachige Gemeinschaft" per article 2 of the Belgian Constitution. "German-speaking Community", with capital C, is a quite straightforward translation. Similarly, we have articles on "Belgium" and "Brussels" which are obvious translations and not in an official local name. Very strictly speaking, there is room for a "German-speaking community of Belgium" topic as a purely linguistic community, similar to the certain language community in any other country. Or you could even write about any country or city as a political/administrative entity as well as a geographical/demographic reality. We would thus need to basically duplicate each topic, however very few such topics make such a distinction, and it seems completely unnecessary to me, certainly if the current one has clear room for improvement. Then there's the question of "Dutch" versus "Flemish", which is a whole can of worms I don't want to re-open again. In any case, Dutch is the official language of the Flemish Community, and Flemish is an ambiguous name, it can refer to Dutch as spoken in Belgium, or certain dialects, but it is not generally seen as a separate language. For all the mentioned and related articles, there is room for improvement and clarification, but there is no need to take the fundamental elements like article titles and languages into question. Regards, SPQRobin (talk) 17:13, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 17 February 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 22:40, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


German-speaking Community of Belgium → Eastern Belgium – Ostbelgien is the official new name as they renamed it in 2017, http://www.euronews.com/2017/04/03/belgium-s-german-speaking-region-gets-a-new-name, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/02/belgium-german-speaking-community-ostbelgien, https://prodg.be/ostbelgien-mehr-als-nur-ein-name/ DeLeeuw83 (talk) 01:08, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose. The cited English-language sources present a more sensationalised view to it, it seems. The new name is more of how the government wants to present itself/the region (a "touristic", "marketing" term, maybe even). The legal, constitutional term remains Deutschsprachige Gemeinschaft. The parliament is still the Parlament der Deutschsprachigen Gemeinschaft Belgiens, with "Ostbelgien" simply as the accompanying logo. Same for the government. "Ostbelgien" is simply a shorthand term that should be prominently mentioned on the article, but not used as main term.
Likewise, I would be opposed to calling the French Community of Belgium the "Brussels-Wallonia Federation". SPQRobin (talk) 14:56, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wouldn't Ostbelgien be "East Belgium" and not "Eastern Belgium"? —  AjaxSmack  01:29, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The proposed name does NOT make the name a little more precise, but less accurate. Artix Kreiger (talk) 04:05, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

definition of "Community" in this context[edit]

I can't find a definition of "Community", including going to other articles about Belgian "Communities". It is ambiguous between territory and people. The use of square kilometres and cities indicates territory, but the article on the French Community says 'The name "French Community" refers to Francophone Belgians', implying people. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 16:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A "Community", as this article should explain, is a political entity (with a government), basically identical to a "Region" in that regard. They both have a certain territory over which they exercise their powers, the difference being that a Community's territory is based on people or more specifically language. Its powers are generally person-related (education, healthcare, ...). In the case of the French Community, its territory is based on where French speakers live, and the sentence you quoted tried to clarify this, i.e. that it has nothing to do with French citizens. So the quoted text is clarifying the "French" in "French Community" rather than the "Community" term. SPQRobin (talk) 22:00, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

description[edit]

It would be useful if this area were more widely described as the cantons of Eupen and Sankt Vith in the province of Liège. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:5988:EC00:697B:E213:1EEF:C2FE (talk) 17:13, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:German-speaking_Community_of_Belgium&oldid=1206028725"