Talk:Ghent

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 September 2018 and 6 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Meganly.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Bikes
Shouldn't there be a chapter on bicycles in Ghent + car free city center? Under Transportation for instance? Bikes are everywhere in Ghent and a very popular means of transport for many people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.22.178.70 (talk) 20:26, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Celtic times
"The city was inhabited in Celtic times." This is meaningless and should be replaced by a date. Piet 14:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay, better now, but anyone has an idea of the earliest settlements of which remains have been found? Piet 15:41, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * For what it is worth, this link mentions: The region of Ghent was settled since the Stone Age and seems to have been inhabited continuously since at least Celtic and Roman times. --Donar Reiskoffer 19:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * for what I can add to that as living in ghent all my life ;-), the earlist foundation of the city are where the to rivers merge. that's the foundation ground. Where "De leie" flows into "De schelde".

The first WRITTEN mention of Ghent is on roman Maps where it was callen Gandium. Ganda is the celtic word that is the origin for the name and in the middle ages the spelling differed from Gend, ghent, Gendt to finally Gent. UPDATE, okay, the enlgish names of the rivers are : Scheldt and Lys, but should it be in the article Scheldt(De schelde) and Lys(de leie)? scheld you can easely see as de schelde, but Lys, before I read this article here I would have had a single idea that it was the english name for De Leie. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Confluence
The Dutch language article claims that ganda could NOT have meant confluence. The explanation is a bit unclear though. Piet 10:57, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation
I know how it's pronunciated, but I don't know IPA well.
 * [IPA: xɛnt] is the hard -ch- sound like loch. This is wrong I think.
 * Soft g for the Dutch pronunciation. I will trust Donarreiskoffer on this: [IPA: ɣɛ:nt]
 * For the English pronunciation, after checking IPA chart for English, I would say [IPA: gɛ:nt] (like go get and gate). Can someone confirm this? Piet 12:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I changed the Dutch pronunciation from [IPA: ɣɛ:nt] to [IPA: ʝɛ:nt]. They are both correct but the first one is as spoken in the (northern) Netherlands, and the second as in Flanders (and the southern Netherlands). As Ghent is a Flemish city the second variant may be preferred. See also: nl:Zachte g. --Donar Reiskoffer 13:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Interesting, I actually thought the hard g was simply [x]. I can't really imagine the three distinct sounds, probably because only two are in the language as I speak and hear it around me. We could add both pronunciations, I don't know what is usual in this case. What do you think for the English IPA pronunciation? It is actually more important since this is the English language wikipedia. Piet 14:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * get show us [gɛt]. The vowel sound in Ghent, is longer than in Get so I think your proposal, [IPA: gɛ:nt], is quite right. --Donar Reiskoffer 17:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I can't read the diacritics used here, but I'd just like to say that the 'g' in Dutch is not pronounced like 'get'. Our 'g' is not a plosive, but a voiced continous fricative pronounced at about the same hight where you'd pronounce [k]. I hope you understand what I mean, it's been a while since I read stuff about pronounciation and I might have mixed up Dutch terms with English ones.

Mayor
Three people (IP adresses) have now changed the name of the mayor from Frank Beke to Daniël Termont. Let me just state once again that the new mayor (and new council) only starts at January 1st, even though the elections were on October 8th. So please don't change the current mayor to give the name of the future one, however correct that will be. You can have a race on January 1st to be the first to change it again though, I won't revert it then anymore ;-) Fram 15:06, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

twin cities
I changed the twin cities,as Des Moines and Miami are NOT twin cities of Ghent. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.123.26.150 (talk) 14:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

Should this article be called Gent or Ghent?
As the city is in the Flemish part of Belgium, should the article use the Flemish not the French name?
 * Ghent is the English name. The French name would be Gand...

Although Ghent may be the name known outside Belgium historically, visitors to Belgium will now see it being refered to primarily by its Flemish name.


 * I was about to disambiguate Gent but I'm not going to now realising that there are countless links to the "wrong" spelling. However, the town's name is spelled Gent in both the German and the Dutch Wikipedia. &lt;K  F&gt;  22:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep, because the city is called "Gent" inboth the German and Dutch language. It is called "Gante" in the Asturian and Spanish Wikipedias, "Gand" in the French Wikipedia, and "Gandavum" in the Latin Wikipedia, since that is the name for the city in these langauges. The article should definitely be called "Ghent", not "Gent", on the English Wikipedia (with "Gent" as a logical and necessary redirect of course). Fram (talk) 09:19, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Fine with me. However, I seem to be a bit slow on the uptake. Does that mean that Gent is Dutch and Ghent is Flemish?
 * If so&mdash;in other words, if cities have their entries under the name used by their respective inhabitants&mdash;wouldn't, say, Rome have to be at Roma? Or is Ghent the correct English spelling as well?
 * My main concern, however, is all those contributors who spell the city Gent and link it like this in their articles. There are so many links of that kind that it would be a tough job going through them all and correcting Gent to Ghent. The other alternative (which, I suppose, you have referred to) would be to move the Gent disambiguation page to Gent (disambiguation) and actually turn Gent into a redirect to Ghent.
 * What do you think? &lt;K  F&gt;  17:34, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I seem to have expressed myself not clear enough. The article on Ghent is placed at the name used for it language X in the X Wikipedia. The Dutch (Flemish) and German name for Ghent is Gent, so the article is there at Gent. The Spanish name for Ghent is Ganda, and the Spanish Wikipedia has an article "Ganda". The French article is at "Gand". So cities have their article under the name used in the language of the Wikipedia (i.c. English), and not under the name used by the inhabitants.
 * As for Gent: I haven't checked, but if it clear from the incoming links that a large majority of the times Ghent is intended, then it may indeed be better to redirect Gent here and to create a Gent (disambiguation). However, this should be discussed at Gent, not here. Fram (talk) 20:36, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. To be continued at Talk:Gent. &lt;K  F&gt;  05:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

H2G2
I removed the trivia section stating "In The Hitchhikers Guide to The Galaxy, Ghent is used as an insult (As in "Zaphod you Ghent"). This could stem from "Belgium" being the most heinous swear word in the galaxy." I have a digital edition of the British version, and it's not in there. If this is only in the American version, it should be stated as such. For now, it's gone, untill someone comes up with a source. 82.146.105.17 12:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Arms-nottingham.jpg
Image:Arms-nottingham.jpg 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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)



A better image
IMO the image of the Graslei at right is an improvement over the assembled panorama that cuts the tops off the towers— and which is already used at Metropolitan areas in Belgium. I'd make the switch myself, but I have a hunch from the way it's displayed the current image is someone's pet.--Wetman (talk) 20:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Ghent April 2012-3.jpg
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Ghent April 2012-3.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on April 10, 2014. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2014-04-10. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:09, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Odd claim in WWI/WWII section
Someone added, "Despite that a lot of judges who collaborated extremely with the Nazi occupier - such as Roland Tack and Christian Van Damme - could keep their positions." They provide no references. I don't buy it. Petecat (talk) 22:13, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Stilted Statements about Ghent's Historical Size
The History section of this article contains the following sentences:
 * By the 13th century, Ghent was the biggest city in Europe north of the Alps after Paris; it was bigger than Cologne, or Moscow. Within the city walls lived up to 65,000 people.

I have concerns about those sentences.
 * 1) In my opinion, that's a strange way of saying "second largest city [...]". You have to wait for the third geographical clause before you are told it isn't the "biggest city".
 * 2) The primary assertion names the only Northern European city that was larger than Ghent at the time. This obviates the need for comparison with two more cities.
 * 3) The second sentence is of lesser concern, but also sounds stilted to me, as though the word order has been reversed:

Except for the unnecessary comparison with Cologne and Moscow, my concerns are subjective, so I prefer to ask first. Should those two sentences be rephrased along these lines?:
 * ''By the 13th century, 65,000 people lived within the city walls, making Ghent the second largest city in Northern Europe (after Paris).

With thanks from ChrisJBenson (talk) 10:00, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Timeline of Ghent
What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content! Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 17:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Motto?
I have been told that Ghent has a motto in Latin, consisting in the words Spes (Hope), Fides (Faith) and Amor (Love), but I don't know in which sequence. Can someone enlighten me? — Tonymec (talk) 18:17, 20 September 2018 (UTC)