![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was selected as the article for improvement on 27 January 2014 for a period of one week. |
Last sentence: "However, the plural term "Koninkrijk der Nederlanden" (Kingdom of the Netherlands) still is the official Dutch name of the country." That is not entirely correct. The official name of the country (the part in continental Europe) is actually "Nederland". The Kingdom also includes Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles, two "dependent" countries in the Carribian. Aruba and the NA have extreme authonomy (they are for instance not even part of the EU), and do definatly not belong to "Nederland".
A disambiguation page is needed to remove ambiguities between this page and the South Carolina Lowcounry page. The Low County redirect page should be modified to redirect to the disambiguation page, not this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.35.67.18 ( talk) 00:07, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
The second paragraph says "...more appropriate to romantic descriptions by authors vice useful diplomatic or geographically accurate and well defined meanings"
This doesn't seem to make sense. Did the author instead mean "versus"? In any case, it's hard to figure what this sentence is saying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.246.199.195 ( talk) 10:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Nonetheless, in modern English usages, the term will occasionally be found, by which is meant the French Netherlands, Kingdom of Belgium and (European main land part) of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
I think it is more commonly used as a description for Belgium and the Netherlands. An alternative for the word Benelux, when Luxemburg doesn't really have anything to do with it.
For example in this article (
Within Temptation) I read: In addition they went to work on their second album, releasing Mother Earth in the Low Countries on December 1st. Clearly here only Belgium and The Netherlands is ment, not French Flanders. Another example is the football derby between Belgium and The Netherlands, which is always called the Derby of the Low Countries
That's why I changed the sentence to:
Nonetheless, in modern English usages, the term will occasionally be found, by which is meant the
Kingdom of Belgium and (European main land part) of the
Kingdom of the Netherlands. Sometimes the French Netherlands are also included in this definition. --
Lamadude (
talk)
23:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
As interesting as the space photo is, it doesn't tell me where, specifically, the Low Countries are. In fact, I just can't figure out (from ANY article) just how there is a difference between the Low Countries and the Netherlands. Can somebody PLEASE do a better job of explaining it, or adding a map that SHOWS the difference? IT'S JUST SO FRUSTRATING! >:@ 74.32.226.113 ( talk) 19:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
This sentence is transfered verbatim from the sourced material...page 25...the author was the information officer of the Marshall Plan mission to the Netherlands in 1949 and 1950-- Buster7 ( talk) 00:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Seems to be a conflict of source material. Do your two sources outweigh my one source? Is that how it works? Seems to me that the adverb "roughly" carries the day.-- Buster7 ( talk) 05:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I checked out your references above. After the sentence that you quote..."When Julius Caesar gave a description...etc" comes the sentence,"In fact, this is nonsense." Im not sure but it seems an undo is in order!-- Buster7 ( talk) 05:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
It's not redundant. It supports it. Maybe clarity isn't your purpose. No need to reply. I won't revert. I'm on Holiday..ta! ta! -- Buster7 ( talk) 13:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Yesterday I removed the category BENELUX from this article. It was undone by [ 1 and described as "Bullshit", which is frankly charming.
Actually, it isn't "Bullshit". Benelux, in the context of the category, does not refer to the geographical entity (and its history) but the economic-customs union established after WWII and possibly any previous economic agreements between the states involved. For the history of Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands - please put it in the appropriate History of... category. Thank you. --- Brigade Piron ( talk) 09:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
"A poetic description also calls the region the Low Countries by the Sea." was marked with a 'citation needed' tag. In Dutch, the phrase 'lage landen bij de zee' (low countries near the sea) is well-known. For example it is the title of a very famous history book. In the royal library's catalogue the are eight book titles with the phrase. Now I wonder if it is okay to take the Dutch version into account? Bever ( talk) 12:47, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
"Historically, the term Low Countries arose at the Court of the Dukes of Burgundy, who used the term les pays de par deça ..." – although the House of Burgundy indisputably played a role in shaping the Low Countries, that this was the origin of the term Nederlanden has been thoroughly disputed on nl:Overleg:Lage Landen. Probably terms for 'low-lying' were already used for the area (though not exclusively) in the Middle Ages. Bever ( talk) 13:29, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was selected as the article for improvement on 27 January 2014 for a period of one week. |
Last sentence: "However, the plural term "Koninkrijk der Nederlanden" (Kingdom of the Netherlands) still is the official Dutch name of the country." That is not entirely correct. The official name of the country (the part in continental Europe) is actually "Nederland". The Kingdom also includes Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles, two "dependent" countries in the Carribian. Aruba and the NA have extreme authonomy (they are for instance not even part of the EU), and do definatly not belong to "Nederland".
A disambiguation page is needed to remove ambiguities between this page and the South Carolina Lowcounry page. The Low County redirect page should be modified to redirect to the disambiguation page, not this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.35.67.18 ( talk) 00:07, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
The second paragraph says "...more appropriate to romantic descriptions by authors vice useful diplomatic or geographically accurate and well defined meanings"
This doesn't seem to make sense. Did the author instead mean "versus"? In any case, it's hard to figure what this sentence is saying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.246.199.195 ( talk) 10:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Nonetheless, in modern English usages, the term will occasionally be found, by which is meant the French Netherlands, Kingdom of Belgium and (European main land part) of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
I think it is more commonly used as a description for Belgium and the Netherlands. An alternative for the word Benelux, when Luxemburg doesn't really have anything to do with it.
For example in this article (
Within Temptation) I read: In addition they went to work on their second album, releasing Mother Earth in the Low Countries on December 1st. Clearly here only Belgium and The Netherlands is ment, not French Flanders. Another example is the football derby between Belgium and The Netherlands, which is always called the Derby of the Low Countries
That's why I changed the sentence to:
Nonetheless, in modern English usages, the term will occasionally be found, by which is meant the
Kingdom of Belgium and (European main land part) of the
Kingdom of the Netherlands. Sometimes the French Netherlands are also included in this definition. --
Lamadude (
talk)
23:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
As interesting as the space photo is, it doesn't tell me where, specifically, the Low Countries are. In fact, I just can't figure out (from ANY article) just how there is a difference between the Low Countries and the Netherlands. Can somebody PLEASE do a better job of explaining it, or adding a map that SHOWS the difference? IT'S JUST SO FRUSTRATING! >:@ 74.32.226.113 ( talk) 19:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
This sentence is transfered verbatim from the sourced material...page 25...the author was the information officer of the Marshall Plan mission to the Netherlands in 1949 and 1950-- Buster7 ( talk) 00:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Seems to be a conflict of source material. Do your two sources outweigh my one source? Is that how it works? Seems to me that the adverb "roughly" carries the day.-- Buster7 ( talk) 05:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I checked out your references above. After the sentence that you quote..."When Julius Caesar gave a description...etc" comes the sentence,"In fact, this is nonsense." Im not sure but it seems an undo is in order!-- Buster7 ( talk) 05:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
It's not redundant. It supports it. Maybe clarity isn't your purpose. No need to reply. I won't revert. I'm on Holiday..ta! ta! -- Buster7 ( talk) 13:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Yesterday I removed the category BENELUX from this article. It was undone by [ 1 and described as "Bullshit", which is frankly charming.
Actually, it isn't "Bullshit". Benelux, in the context of the category, does not refer to the geographical entity (and its history) but the economic-customs union established after WWII and possibly any previous economic agreements between the states involved. For the history of Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands - please put it in the appropriate History of... category. Thank you. --- Brigade Piron ( talk) 09:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
"A poetic description also calls the region the Low Countries by the Sea." was marked with a 'citation needed' tag. In Dutch, the phrase 'lage landen bij de zee' (low countries near the sea) is well-known. For example it is the title of a very famous history book. In the royal library's catalogue the are eight book titles with the phrase. Now I wonder if it is okay to take the Dutch version into account? Bever ( talk) 12:47, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
"Historically, the term Low Countries arose at the Court of the Dukes of Burgundy, who used the term les pays de par deça ..." – although the House of Burgundy indisputably played a role in shaping the Low Countries, that this was the origin of the term Nederlanden has been thoroughly disputed on nl:Overleg:Lage Landen. Probably terms for 'low-lying' were already used for the area (though not exclusively) in the Middle Ages. Bever ( talk) 13:29, 15 March 2015 (UTC)