Talk:Cape Town

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cape Town article.
Article policies
Former featured article Cape Town 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 trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 18, 2006.
This article is supported by WikiProject Cities, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to cities, towns, and various other settlements on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the priority scale.
Africa
Africa Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Africa, which collaborates on articles related to Africa in Wikipedia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject South Africa. See also The South Africa Portal.
Assessment comments
Cape Town is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.
Peer review This Geography article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale (comments).

Contents

[edit] Households made up of individuals?

what is "16.1% of all households are made up of individuals." supposed to mean? Moe Aboulkheir 15:20, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Probably lone inhabitants, as opposed to families. --Piet Delport 15:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
"16.1 percent of households are headed by one person" means that they are single parent families chrisboote 15:19, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Replace Gauteng map

PLEASE replace the map on this page (of Gauteng) with one of Cape Town! Mark

[edit] Victoria & Alfred

Is it the "Victoria & Alfred" rather than "Victoria & Albert"? Yes it is, and that's what is says now...

'Victoria & Albert' is the obvious association since they were married, but 'Alfred' is correct because the two original docks were named after (a) Queen Victoria and (b) her son, Alfred, who made an official state visit to South Africa on her behalf as a young teenager.--66.8.31.110 12:43, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Remove promotional links?

Should anything be done about all the promotional external links popping up on this page ? Wizzy 16:11, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Major clean up

  1. I prefer Image:Capetown.jpg ?
  2. When leaving Cape Town - lose it ?
  3. My problem with these huge edits is that stuff creeps in - There was also a shortage of women in the colony, so the Europeans exploited the female slaves for both labour and sex.
    1. Can you either re-arrange, or edit, but not both ?

Lots more like this. I am inclined to revert, and please ask PZFUN to do the edits piecemeal ? Wizzy…☎ 14:13, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Be bold. I am just bringing Cape Town into the same format used in Johannesburg, the only South African featured article about a city at the moment. And there was a shortage of women at the Cape Colony, and female slaved were exploited for sex. Where do you think the Cape Coloureds come from? Páll 18:21, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Exploitation (one presumes). Some might think otherwise. My point is not that edit, but that it has been slipped in with a ton of other stuff. What else slipped in ?

  • so the VOC was forced to import - I thought there were strict rules about fraternising with the natives, so VOC wanted to import.
  • the VOC was nearly bankrupt - no, I thought it was machinations in the Napoleonic wars.
  • Bubonic plague gave the government an excuse to introduce racial segregation - references please ?

But, please, I am not arguing the merits of these edits, you could be right.

My argument is the manner of their introduction, obscured under a Major clean up. Do you see ? It is very hard to spot these changes in the wikidiff.

Might I suggest that when undertaking something major like this again, you re-arrange without changing content, and say so, and then edit in a few big chunks.

It is not about Boldness, it is about Obscurely introducing edits that become difficult to undo. It is unfriendly editing. If I wanted to hijack a page, I would do something like this. Lots of good stuff, and a bunch of my own POV stuff tangled up in a good-faith edit. Not you, I. Wizzy…☎ 18:57, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Adding a comment here as the line I have questions about was mentioned above, though not in the same context. I have two issues with the sentence below: Grammar and POV The city grew slowly during this period, as it was hard to find adequate labourers, thus forcing the importing of slaves from Indonesia and Madagascar; many of whom would come to form the first of the Cape Coloured communities.

Grammar: Very awkward sentence, but it is easily fixed by splitting it into two. POV: "forced the importing of slaves"? I have a REALLY hard time believing that ANYBODY was forced to import slaves. "Oh, I really didn't WANT to have to enslave another human being, but gosh, it is SO hard to find good help these days!" Not.

This can be solved with a more cause and effect type of statement: The city grew slowly during this period, as it was hard to find adequate labourers. This labour shortage prompted the importing of slaves from Indonesia and Madagascar; many of whom would come to form the first of the Cape Coloured communities.

I rarely make changes on a FA, but this one is a little too much to let go.

Otherwise, a very interesting article. I am adding it to my list of places to fill my passport with someday! Thanks to the contributors!Thepearl 14:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Xhosa name

Currently the Xhosa name is given as eKapa or SaseKapa. Any source on that? I don't know Xhosa well, but it looks quite suspect. I suspect it should be iKapa. eKapa: in Cape Town. SaseKapa: (something unspecified) of Cape Town.

Yeah, you're right. I've changed it to iKapa. I can't speak Xhosa, but I do speak Zulu and they have very similar grammar - the e- prefix is a locative, meaning, as you say, 'in / at / to / from Cape Town' This is always the case (ekhaya means 'at home', ikhaya means 'home'). As for SaseKapa, that: 1) makes no sense on it's own (of Cape Town), 2) Is conjugated to agree with a noun of the isi- class (Sas), so I've added Isixeko (city).

Al, Joziboy 24 Feb 2006, 12:52 UTC

Ja, I suspect that the "SaseKapa" that was there comes from the the fact that the City of Cape Town (the municipality) is called "Isixeko saseKapa", and someone who doesn't understand Xhosa conjugation assumed that SaseKapa was just the name for Cape Town. What I remember from Xhosa lessons at school agrees with what you know from Zulu - "Cape Town", standing alone, is "iKapa". - htonl 19:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

Great infobox - please fix the map ?? Wizzy…☎ 11:58, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Yes yes, I just haven't made a map of the Western Cape yet! Páll (Die pienk olifant) 17:11, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Another point of view

I've travelled to ZA every year for the last decade (sometimes twice a year)

  • I always fly into Cape Town first, and almost always leave from there
  • I've always flown BA (all four classes), and never had any problems except with the heat in the plane on return journeys - the crew have always been superb, yes they are sometimes late, but show me an airline that isn't!
  • I only tip parking attendants on return to the car - and make sure they know that. Tipping is small change for most Europeans & Americans - R10 per hour seems to be generous
  • ALWAYS claim back the VAT. Flying out of Cape Town it is simple & efficient - so what if you don't get all the VAT back, it still pays for your meal while you're waiting
  • Leave plenty of time - possibly as much as 2 hours for 1st & Club class, 3 for economy and economy plus - when checking in for international flights at Cape Town, security staff are slow.....
  • For domestic flights, however, 30 mins is fine (unless you have reams of luggage)
  • Best internal flights are from Nationwide
  • Like every city in the world, Cape Town has its rough bits, but there is lots to do in the safe areas - which is most of it
  • DEFINITELY drive along the [Garden Route] if you have time
  • Do not miss Boulders Beach near Simonstown, the penguins are very friendly. If you go to the south beach, there is no walkway, and you can paddle & swim with them
  • Robben island is fascinating, and you do NOT have to be a diehard BP fanatic to enjoy the tour
  • Car hire is very very very cheap compared with most of Europe - it's only expensive if you book in advance with foreign currency

chrisboote 15:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Location of Ndabeni

I changed the sentence that said that Ndabeni was located on the "western flanks" of Table Mountain as this was simply wrong. Ndabeni is in fact east of Cape Town.

[edit] Mayor of CT

"There hasve been many instances of the mayor giving out tenders to unqualified persons: in December 2005 it was exposed that she had given out a so-called Diamond District feasibility study tender to someone who knew absolutely nothing about diamonds. A parking metering tender was also reversed by the courts in Nov 2005 owing to corruption."

Removed this text as currently unreferenced and therefore possibly slanderous. If anyone wants this info to go in, perhaps they can rewrite it in the wiki way for contentious stuff - there are examples of how to use newspaper articles to communicate contentious stuff at Wikipedia:Verifiability, WP:CITE, eg, "The Cape Sugra reported, 'The Mayor has two heads' (30 Feb 2017)".

Also, earlier text refers to Mayor as "he", later as "she". Perhaps same contributor can sort this out. (I'm not in Cape Town and don't have resources to do all this.) JackyR 15:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest that most of this stuff about the mayor and corruption is somewhat POV and out of context in the page about Cape Town. Also, by being heavily political on a largely non-political page, it encourages edit wars. What about creating a page about the mayor herself, and letting debates about the mayor happen there? Zaian 18:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, even if true and verified, this stuff really doesn't belong with CT itself. A new article is certainly a way to address that. I was about to ask, does the topic warrant such an article, but then thought of the endless dross about very minor politicians all over WP: clearly someone thinks so. Can't summon the enthusiasm to do it myself, tho... :-) JackyR 23:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I've created a page for Nomaindia Mfeketo but it's only a stub. I don't feel like filling the page with someone else's text about how corrupt she is. If someone else wants to move this text from the Cape Town page to the mayor's page, please do. Some interesting trivia I read about the unusual name "Nomaindia": I read that someone else in her family is called Nomaengland or Noma-something else. If someone has the source, it might be worth including. Zaian 10:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Indian Ocean is at Cape Agulhas

Fine, I'll do this as a discussion point even though it is common knowledge among everyone except the tourists. Cape Town is NOT sandwiched between the Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean. It is wholly situated on the Atlantic Ocean. The border between the Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean is 120km away at Cape Agulhas. See http://www.capeinfo.com/WCregions/Agulhas/agulhasOceans.asp

Not by any stretch of the imagination is this a Cape Town sandwich. If you won't let me fix it, then you do so.

While I agree with you about this fact, sarcastic edits such as "or would be, except that the Indian Ocean is actually 120km away at Cape Agulhas" is certainly not the way to go about correcting this ... please be civil and constructice if you want to edit Wikipedia. Elf-friend 08:41, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. I actually corrected this nicely but it was reversed by dewet, I also corrected some basic spelling errors and also had those reversed, which I felt was unnecessarily pedantic. This annoyed me. I will now give my reasons for changes beforehand.

Unless its obviously controversial, you probably don't need even to do that: the Edit summary box is where to leave a quick note about your change/reasons. Just don't expect facetiousness to survive in the article – and of course, a revert takes any good changes go with too.

The Indian Ocean statement reappeared in the article following a recent edit. The definitive reference for the Indian Ocean ending at Cape Agulhas is the International Hydrographic Organization's Limits of Oceans and Seas. According to the link given earlier in this discussion, the SA Navy and the Oceanography department at UCT accept this boundary. Only the tourist bodies (and proud locals) seem to claim that the Indian Ocean ends at Cape Point, so this is hardly encyclopedic. I've removed the claim from the article. Zaian 01:24, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Names on the side

Does anyone know how to do the big lettering above the infobox? Both this article and Joburg have it, and I'd like to do the same for Durban but don't know how. Any help would be much appreciated! Joziboy 11 March 2006, 16:25 (UTC)

[edit] City of Cape Town vs Cape Town

The intro paragraph and the title of the info box are back as City of Cape Town. It seems to me that there is a useful distinction between Cape Town itself, and its municipality, which is called City of Cape Town. Since this is the city page, the title, intro paragraph and info box should be Cape Town, plain and simple. Using City of is not a Wikipedia standard - can I ask why is was reintroduced? Zaian 08:56, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

You'll have to ask PZFUN - he's the one who insists on "City of Cape Town" on the article and the infobox. As I see it, "City of Cape Town" is the name of the municipality - which has its own article at, not surprisingly, City of Cape Town; the city is called "Cape Town". But I hope that he will explain his position here. - htonl 09:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
This naming is out of line with all the other city pages I have looked at, and the intro paragraph and info box should be changed back to Cape Town. I say this with great respect for PZFUN's many excellent contributions, and not wishing to distract him from his work on the history section! City of Cape Town is not the full name of Cape Town, it's just the name of the municipality. The only time I ever see it used is on my bills from the council. Zaian 12:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
I absolutely agree. PZFUN is a great editor; I just hope he'll come here so we can reach some consensus. Similarly to you, the only place I see "City of Cape Town" is on the rates bill and other communication from the city council. I'm not going to change it back to Cape Town myself as I've already done it twice and don't want to step precariously close to 3RR; and also because I hope we can reach a consensus. - htonl 13:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry guys, I remember adding the City of to the infobox a while back because the Xhosa name was SaseKapa, and as I mentioned earlier, that makes no sense without Isixeko. But I agree, it should just be Cape Town, Kaapstad and iKapa Joziboy 12 March 2006, 18:21 (UTC)

Because it is the standard to include the full name of the entity as dictated by the Manual of Style. Thus, the article for South Africa has the infobox title of Republic of South Africa, etc. New York City's main bolding is the City of New York. Páll (Die pienk olifant) 04:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I have no problem with including "City of" in the Cape Town article, in a similar fashion to New York City; i.e., "Cape Town, or officially the City of Cape Town, is ..." dewet|™ 06:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
What we're saying here is that "City of Cape Town" is not the official name of the city - it's the name of the city administration, and therefore shouldn't be used in the intro paragraph. Zaian 07:27, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
*shrug* It really doesn't matter to me one way or the other. As another suggestion, how about: "Cape Town (Afrikaans: Kaapstad /ˈkɑːpstɑt/; Xhosa: iKapa) is the third most populous city in South Africa, forming part of the metropolitan municipality of the City of Cape Town." I'd remove the dablink right above it, then. dewet|™ 10:08, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I think the reason New York City has the 'city' included is to differentiate it from New York (the state). It's also sometimes known as NYC, whereas Cape Town is never known as City of Cape Town. London doesn't have 'city of' either. I like Dewet's suggestion. Joziboy 14 March 2006, 12:30 (UTC)

That's because the City is a suburb of London, not the name. Also, NYC has always been known as NEw York City, it has nothing to do with New York State. If Cape Town is never known as the City of Cape Town, why is its website, at [1] called "The City of Cape Town", etc? Páll (Die pienk olifant) 16:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
That's because that website is is the official site of the governmental or administrative entity, which is called (in full) "City of Cape Town Metropolitan Municipality" - and that has its own article at City of Cape Town. This article, however, is about the geographical or cultural/demographic entity. That is somewhat - but not exactly - contiguous in area with the governmental entity; for example, Somerset West is not generally considered to be geographically part of Cape Town (it is a separate town) but it is administered by the City of Cape Town. They are two separate things: the city, and the city's administration; it's like the difference between Pretoria and the City of Tshwane. If we're talking about London, then using "City of Cape Town" as the highlighted name for this article would be a bit like using "Greater London Authority" as the highlighed name in the London article. But if we're going to bandy about other city articles as precedent, what about Boston? I should add that I also like Dewet's idea. - htonl 19:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I also support Dewets' suggestion. Elf-friend 06:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I like Dewet's suggestion too. The Council page at [2] says "The City of Cape Town is a brand new, single municipal structure that replaces the Cape Metropolitan Council and the six Metropolitan Local Councils". I think this makes it clear that "City of" is the name of the government structure, not of the city itself. Zaian 08:47, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] N2

Hi, the image labeled "The N2 on the way out of Cape Town." actaully shows traffic flowing into Cape Town on the N2 near Athlone power station. If you were coming out, you wouldn't see the mountain.

Fixed, thanks. Zaian 15:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good article

A "Well done!" to the contributors. Metamagician3000 10:26, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images

For such a beautiful city, the article is a bit low on pretty pictures. I happen to live in Cape Town and will try to add some, but I was wondering if anybody else happens to have some handy? Banez 16:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I took lots of great photos in Cape Town over Easter (including some great panoramic stitches), I'll try adding some soon. --ClaudeS 10:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To Do list

Work on the To Do list at the top of this page has gone quiet. Any objections to removing it from this page? Zaian 08:14, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Featured Status?

This article is starting to look real good - isn't it time to consider a nomination to Featured Status? Or should one hang on a bit? I am considering listing it for peer review - any objections? -- Chris Lester talk 18:24, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I know Páll has been planning on doing this; he's asked me to take a few photos, which I plan on doing this coming week, should the weather allow... I feel the article is very close to being ready for FA; maybe a peer review so long would be just the thing? dewet|✉ 19:14, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
There's still a lot more I'd like to ad. Please don't nominate it yet! I need to do a lot of work to the tourism secton. Páll (Die pienk olifant) 22:08, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I have listed it for peer review (see above)... -- Chris Lester talk 18:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed merger of Cape Town City Hall

User:Hellahulla proposed that Cape Town City Hall be merged to this article. I'm not opposed to the merger, but I was wondering whether it would be better merged here or to City of Cape Town. Is the City Hall still the official seat of government (as it were) of the council? And what do the rest of you feel about the merge? - htonl 21:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why it should be merged anywhere, personally. Páll (Die pienk olifant) 22:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Upon mature reflection, I agree with you - although the article is really short at the moment, a quick Googling brings up enough info to fill it out to no-longer-stub size. After all, the fact that Nelson Mandela's first public speech after his release was made at the City Hall is enough to make it worthy of an article even ignoring any other considerations. If nobody else gets to it first, I'll expand it tomorrow. - htonl 22:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Something is wrong...

"As a result of the Dutch entering the war, the British invaded the Netherlands in 1795. By this time, the VOC had lost almost all of its influence in Cape Town and was almost completely bankrupt. When the Netherlands fell to the British, British soldiers were moved to the Cape in a garrison to prevent a French invasion." According to Dutch Republic, "The Republic of the United Provinces was officially recognized in the Peace of Westphalia (1648), and lasted until French revolutionary forces invaded in 1795 and set up a new republic, called the Batavian Republic". The article American Revolutionary War says "also in 1780, the British struck against the United Provinces of the Netherlands in order to preempt Dutch involvement in the League of Armed Neutrality". According to the article, the war between the British and the Dutch ended i 1784. (Fourth Anglo-Dutch War). What is correct? Did the British invade Netherlands in 1795? And if this is correct, could you give me a citation... Shauni 11:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

It was the French who invaded in 1795. I have hidden it until it can be rewritten --Astrokey44 01:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] refuelling station

I think this statement should be changed to "restocking" or something like that, because i imagine they would also get food and water ect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Rorrenig (talk • contribs)

This seemed a little anachronistic to me too, doubtless fuel (for galley stoves etc) would have been taken on, but the major stuff loaded (since we're talking age of sail) would have been fresh food (meat and vegetables) and water. Victualling station might be the most accurate description. David Underdown 08:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] featured

Congrats on getting the article featured today guys! It's excellent :) Joziboy 09:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crime

I'm kind of surprised that the word "crime" is only mentioned once in this entire article. If it's really that high, which I have heard, then there should be more than one sentence on it. It's kind of the reason I'm too scared to ever visit Cape Town. -newkai | talk | contribs 10:55, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't be scared!
Crime is actually very low in Cape Town in comparison with, say, Jo'burg or Durban. In my 10 years as a tourist there, I've never suffered even petty theft or vandalism, which are the most common mishaps to befall those few travellers unluckly enough to encounter crime
Yes, there are 'bad bits', buit common sense and ASKING THE LOCALS will keep you clear of them
Use the tourist buses if you're worried about travelling on foot, stay in Clifton or Simonstown and travel into CPT by bus each day if you're worried about the city centre
I urge you to visit the world's friendliest city 8-)
chrisboote 15:45, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
OK, maybe I will! -newkai | talk | contribs 23:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh don't be such a baby! Go visit Cape Town. I'm sure you've flown on a plane before, and that's also dangerous. PS How is it that you were born in Germany and yet declare yourself to be a mother-tongue speaker of English? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.207.33.197 (talk) 19:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inaccuracies and anachronisms

This article contained several inaccuracies and anachronisms which I have corrected. They were: that the British won both Anglo-Boer Wars (they only won the second), that gold was the cause of both wars (it was only a factor in the second) and that the Union of South Africa was formed in 1910 out of the former South African Republic, Orange Free State, Cape Province and Natalia (when in fact the Natalia Republic had been annexed by Britain as early as the 1840s). Booshank 15:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but the Union itself was only formed in 1910, right? The Natalia Republic wasn't part of the Union from 1840. Anyway. FlyBang 23:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spammy links

I just removed 2 spammy links from the "External links" section, but there are 3 more that I am not sure about. These are they:

What do you think? Are they spammy, or are they useful enough to include in the article? - htonl 10:47, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree with htonl on this one. This is why:
  1. Websites for profit should not be included, unless it is central to the article. (E.g. expedia should not be linked to the Delta Air Lines page, but can well be linked to the Expedia page). This therefore means that [3] should really be the first to go - it simply advocates various accomodation options. My vote is to delete it.
  2. Websites with information pertaining particularly for tourists, may not really be relevant in a broad-based encyclopedia - the call with regards to [4] is far closer: maybe a move to WikiTravel is on the cards?
  3. A website seeking advertise should also not be allowed. This one [5] has hotel specials, etc. and so it too should be deleted.
It may well be worth the while deleting the lot from this page. If there is no disagreement, I'll do it soon. -- Chris Lester talk 19:36, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
I disagree on Cape Town Magazine: The offical newspaper site Cape Times, News24, or Iol.co.za seeks advertising. Cape Town Magazine features different South African artists every month, different social projects, media, and movies, many articles, and things to do. The hotel specials are less then 5% of the size of the site and less then any other booking site. They are a first magazine making this effort. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.241.24.51 (talk • contribs)
I think it is a matter of degree. The Cape Times and Argus (i.e. IOL) (as well as Die Burger) are the newspapers of record (as it were) for Cape Town; the articles on their websites can be expected to be of general use as references for all sorts of information about Cape Town. Cape Town Magazine, as far as I can tell, is specifically information for tourists. As Chris points out above, websites specifically for tourists are quite probably not relevant to a general newspaper article. In any case, what makes Cape Town Magazine more relevant or useful than any other of the multitude of Cape Town tourist-related websites? - htonl 17:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I should have been clearer. In order for a link to be put on Wikipedia, it must be:
* Relevant to the article
* Not have an amount of advertising which outweighs the benefit of the link being there
The reputable papers are relevant to the article, and the amount of advertising does not outweigh the use of them, whereas for the Cape Town Magazine, it does. I would guess that someone placed the link there for direct financial benefit. Also, I would challenge the use of such a link in a general encyclopedia. It looks like this view is consistent. -- Chris Lester talk 07:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Exactly. Is there a WP policy page somewhere that lays out these guidelines? If not, maybe we should start one? - htonl 12:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Was reading this page and it's interesting. both Capeinfo.com & CapeTownMagazine.com are - in my eyes - highly relevant sites and reputable in cape town, and yet there are some terribly (only tourism related) sites as external link - ghoemalive 12:42, 28 October 2007

[edit] Seal of Cape Town

There is an article about the Seal of Cape Town, but I can't see how to work in a link to it on Cape Town or the history article. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 03:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


There is an error in the layout of this article with IE (but not in Firefox). The first image, a panorama overlaps the lateral content.

No it also happens in FF 2.0 (or whatever the latest version is) Pure Oxygen 16:53, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Layout

There seems to be a bit of a problem with the layout in FireFox. Does anyone know how to fix it or should that panorama view be moved lower down? -- Chris Lester talk 17:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest, there seems to be more of a problem with the Internet Explorer version of the page. Dannpm 17:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Accurate Record Maximum Temperatures

I'm pretty sure after having temperatures in the 40's and some places in the Western Cape close to 50, that a few monthly records were broken in Cape Town, and thus the temperature table should be looked at and seen if it needs updating. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.82.181 (talk • contribs)

I notice that the figures for the extreme recorded temperatures have been changed and a different source has been used, and that the new figures are more extreme. The previous figures came from the South African Weather Service (SWS) for the 30 years from 1961. Perhaps the new figures are more recent or cover a longer historical period but there is no primary source quoted by the BBC, neither do they say what period they are from. In my opinion the SWS is a more reputable source than the BBC page as it is a primary source and gives dates for the figures. Booshank 19:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First European Permanent Settlement in Sub-Saharan Africa?

I'm not sure this is the case. The Portuguese were active in sub-Saharan Africa prior to 1652, and it wouldn't surprise me if one of their posts actually became a permanent community. Sao Tome comes to mind, founded in 1485 (it's not on the mainland, but I'm quite sure it qualifies as sub-Saharan Africa).

Yeah, Luanda in Angola's older than Cape Town... it was founded by the portuguese in 1575... ie 77 years before Cape Town. ThatDeadDude 16:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, I've changed that statement in the article to "first permanent European settlement in South Africa". - htonl 17:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
This was brought up at WP:ERRORS today[6] because Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/April 6 still listed it as Subsaharan Africa. I'm changing it to South Africa, but can we get an actual cite to add to this article to confirm the South Africa claim, or have we been doing some original research here? --Elonka 08:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Do I understand correctly that you want a cite for Cape Town being the oldest european settlement in South Africa? To South Africans that would be like requesting a cite for the wetness of water. It really does fall into the common knowlege category and thus might actually be hard to find a good citation. Roger (talk) 21:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree with you that it is common knowledge. But if we need a cite, there is, for example, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/countries/southafrica.html#history which says:
Although European vessels frequently passed by South Africa on their way to E Africa and India, and sometimes stopped for provisions or rest, no permanent European settlement was made until 1652, when Jan van Riebeeck and about 90 other persons set up a provisioning station for the Dutch East India Company at Table Bay on the Cape of Good Hope.
I assume the Washington Post would be considered reliable, although I can probably dig up a cite from a more 'appropriate' historical source if necessary. - htonl (talk) 14:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
The Washington Post is an extremely reliable source, that looks great, thanks. --Elonka 01:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Map of Cape Town to show where it's located in relation to the rest of South Africa

The map in the Infobox doesn't give anyone that isn't familiar with the area of South Africa an idea at what they are looking at. Sure I don't know the area at all but I'm completely lost at what I'm looking at. The description says "Location of the City of Cape Town in Western Cape Province" which doesn't even appear to be the exact area of what this article is covering? Am I lost or...? Strawberry Island 23:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Tourism

Are there really ferries going from the Waterfront to Hout Bay? I know Cape Town extremely well, but have never hear about this. Any source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghoemalive (talk • contribs) 20:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removals POV

The following sentence I think is blatently POV and emotional: "Cape Town, like Durban, has become notorious for trying to implement apartheid style forced removals of shack dwellers from the centre of the city to transit camps on the periphery."

To call removing squatters "apartheid style" is very POV. Authorities in most countries will remove people who occupy land illegally or build without planning permission and so to call it "apartheid style" is over emotional. Further to say the city has become "notorious" is also POV as it assumes the removals are in themselves a bad thing. Would one write that New York was "notorious" for arresting pickpockets or London was "notorious" for removing illegal traders? 79.72.241.210 (talk) 18:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Agree it's probably POV, and now also uncited as I've removed the unreliable source it was using. Socrates2008 (Talk) 02:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Page layout

There is a lot of empty space in the upper part of the page - so much that one gets an impression that the intro paragraph and the infobox is all there is! Unfortunately I don't know how to fix it, could someone who does please do so. Roger (talk) 13:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)