Talk:Luxembourg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page has been vandalised, luxembourg is a grand duchy not a republic.

WikiProject Echo has identified Luxembourg as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Czech language Wikipedia.

Luxembourg 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.

	This article is supported by the WikiProject on Countries, which collaborates on nations and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Luxembourg, or visit the project page for more details.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on its quality.

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).

	Luxembourg is within the scope of WikiProject Luxembourg, a collaboration intended to improve the coverage of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg at the English language Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page..
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Nicknames

Hm... Are these nicknames true or just vandalism? Bokassa particularly sounds funny. Muhamedmesic 20:43, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

both actually. They are the nicknames used in the satirical weekly Feierkrop. pir 21:30, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Luxembourgeois

there are some categories "luxembourgish people" but I always thought luxembourgeois was more appropriate? Dunc_Harris|☺ 22:08, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

If you do a google search (restricted to supposedly english websites) for "luxembourgeois" you get 20'000 hits, and the vast majority of these seem to be in French ("luxembourgeois" seems to be based on the common misconception that French is the native language in Luxembourg) ; "luxembourgish" gives 100'000 hits (usually for the Luxembourgish language. A third possibility is "luxembourgian" (6'000 hits). All these sound weird and are best avoided if at all possible. According to the the Oxford Dictionary, the correct adjective is "Luxembourg" : so it should probably be "Luxembourg people" - pir 23:23, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think of Luxemburgish being the most appropriate, thanks to the native language using Letzëbuergesch.Cameron Nedland (talk) 21:56, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality

I think the Economy section seems a tad biased as to the "greatness" of the EU economic zone. Whether or not it is beneficial to be a part of the EU is completely subjective. Steve Holt! 19:31, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Luxembourg as a principality

According to principality, "A principality is a form of sovereign state or territory ceremonially led or directly governed by a monarch with the title of prince or princess. Another type of principality called a grand duchy is led by a monarch called a duke or duchess."

Constitutional Monarchy and Principality are not mutually exclusive categories IMO. A Google search for Luxembourg and principality returns rather more hits than for Luxembourg and constiturional monarchy. There are also more than 100 hits for "Principality of Luxembourg". If you think the category is disputed, say so rather than removing it (cf. Wales). Rls 15:41, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The google hits are the product of misconceptions based on ignorance of Luxembourg's history and political life. Luxembourg is not a Principality, because the Grand Duke plays no role in the political and public life. This is as a result of the crisis after WW1. During WW1 Luxembourg was occupied by the Germans (Luxembourg was officially a neutral country at the time, and the German occupiers allowed the government and Grand Duchess Marie Adelaide to remain and carry out their functions) and Grand Duchess Maire Adelaide was behaving rather too friednly towards the occupiers. After the liberation, Marie Adelaide was forced to abdicate and the constitution was modified so that henceforth sovereignty was vested in the people of Luxembourg. In a referendum in 1919, the people of Luxembourg decided to keep the monarchy, and the royals decided to keep out of public affairs. For more info you could check [1] and [2]. The Grand-Duke's job is to shake hands with visiting foreign leaders, put his sig on laws made by Parliament, tell the leader of the party that comes first in elections to form a government, give a well-meaning TV speech for Christmas, live in a castle, draw a lot of money for all his hard work and for the rest to keep his trap shut. Basically the Grand-Duke hasn't got anything to say. So the correct characterisation of the state form is Constitutional Monarchy, and Luxembourg is not a Principality any more than e.g. the UK is. As for Wales, most Welsh reject that it is a principality, and it should be removed from the category. - pir 17:04, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

From principality (emphasis mine): A principality is a form of sovereign state or territory ceremonially led or directly governed by a monarch with the title of prince or princess. A particular type of principality called a Grand Duchy is led by a monarch called a duke or duchess.

From your description, that doesn't sound too far off. In any case, it seems to be popularly classified as a principality, so I think the category is appropriate. A note about its disputed status in the article would seem to be the best way of resolving this.

BTW I am Welsh and while I'm not keen on the label, I have to concede that Wales is technically a principality (or at least is popularly described as a principality) having as it does a (albeit imposed) prince as ceremonial leader. Rls 20:57, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

If the text at Principality were true, you would of course be correct. But it most certainly is not correct. A country is a principality if and only if the sovereign bears the title of prince (see [3]). And the grand-duchy-ruled-by-duke part is bogus, too. If the sovereign is a duke, it's a duchy (there are no sovereign duchies left). If the sovereign is a grand duke, it's a grand duchy (Luxembourg is the only one left). If the sovereign is a king, it's a kingdom. And so on. Luxembourg's sovereign is a grand duke, so it's a grand duchy, not a principality. And no, it doesn't have anything to do with the sovereign having power or not. See the table at Monarch. -- Jao 07:04, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

What if sovereignty is vested in the people rather than the monarch? - pir 09:02, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

There is some confusion over what is a prince though. From the OED [4], the word may be used as a title of courtesy in certain connexions to a duke, marquis, or earl. Also, The ruler of a principality or small state actually, nominally, or originally, a feudatory of a king or emperor -- it seems to me that Luxembourg could be described as a principality. I've now updated principality -- see what you think. I now think Grand Duchy and/or Duchy could be a category on their own, possibly subcategorised within Principality. Rls 15:45, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The appropriate category is constitutional monarchy, not principality. That's the term which is always used for the state form in relevant publications. This is important, because sovereignty is vested in the people of Luxembourg, who chose in a referendum to keep the monarchy, but the monarch only has symbolic and no political power, his power are limited in the constitution. If you want to create the Grand Duchy category for just a single article, that's fair enough, but please make it a subcategory of constitutional monarchy and not principality. - pir 16:42, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

There are articles on states that no longer exist that are Grand Duchies, so it wouldn't be a single article category -- and many of them were not constitutional monarchies. I see no reason though why the article shouldn't be under both the Monarchies category (or Consitutional Monarchies if it is ever created) as it is currently and Principalities/Grand Duchies. What do you think of the revised principality article? After some googling it seems to me that "principality" is sometimes used as an umbrella term. Rls 17:23, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I grew up and lived in Luxembourg for 20 years and I didn't come across the idea that Luxembourg might be a principality even once. That is the reason why I'm very much opposed to including it in the category "principality", and I don't find your defence here convincing. With the demise of the feudal system, the arrival of democracy and the downgrading of monarchs to mere symbols of national independence, I really can't see the use of distinguishing between states that are kingdoms, duchies, grand-duchies and principalities. Had we been writing Wikipedia 300 years ago it would have been informative, today it is irrelevant and anachronystic. Thus, constitutional monarchy is the most appropriate characterisation of the state of Luxembourg (and other surviving European monarchies): it tells the reader that the people of Luxembourg decided to keep the monarch rather than chop his head off, but that he hasn't got anything to say because his power is limited by a constitution. (In that sense there is actually a very big difference between being categorised as a "principality" and a "constitutional monarchy".) That is all that matters nowadays, and there is really very little difference between the the state form of Luxembourg and e.g. Belgium or the UK (although AFAIK, sovereignty is not vested in the English and Welsh, who are still subjects of HRM). I don't quite understand what you want to achieve with your categorisation drive of principalities and grand-duchies (although I can see the point with historical examples).

As for you suggestion that Grand-Duchies are somehow a subgroup of principalities, I'm not very convinced (my Oxford dictionary doesn't say anything of the sort, I checked German and French Wikipedias and they contained no hint either), but I'm not very knowledgeable in these aristocratic matters (it may be more of a question of sloppy use of the English language) so I won't revert your edits to the principality article as the new statement isn't too strong. - pir 23:05, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to "achieve" anything other than accuracy. Someone wanting to research e.g. the history of grand duchies would naturally expect to find Luxembourg in the list. Anyway, I was going to add a grand ducheys category, but checking the other articles that would be in the list reveals that several of them now exist as something else -- so the category does mostly reduce to a single article (there would have to be an "ex-grand ducheys" cat or something...) I've therefore decided not to bother, and removed Luxembourg from the Principality category too. Rls 22:26, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I completely agree with you on accuracy, and I also agree that from the historical perspective Cat:Grand-Duchies is the most accurate, but maintain that for the contemporary form of state Cat:Constitutional Monarchy is the most accurate. - pir 09:16, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

What a ridiculous waste of effort, is it really not blindingly obvious that a grand-duchy is not a principality? Luxembourg is both a grand-duchy and a constitutional monarchy in the same way that the US is both a Republic and a Federal Democracy. One implies who the recognised head of state is and the other is an attribute of the system of government. To be a principality you need... Guess what? A Prince!... And a Grand Duke, presides over a grand-duchy. No!!! Surely not??!... Yes. Two seconds, two bloody seconds, is all this takes. The facilitation of about a third of the operational capacity of the grey matter in your skull. I've never seen such a strong argument against the value of open collaborative research in all the time I've been using Wikipedia. --JamesTheNumberless 12:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

As I understand it the German princes were Prince/"Furst" is a title of independent sovereignty confered to nobles that may hold other titles and who have not yet attained the rank of king in Continental Europe. Therefore, a Grand Duke acting as head of state would be a "Prince", yes? Under that definition we could call it *either* a Grand Duchy/Principality/Constitutional Monarchy.Nickjost 03:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spelling

Excuse my ignorance, but what's the secret plan behind spelling the Lëtzebuergesch name and motto differenty here and there? --Glimz 00:38, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)

Corrected

[edit] EC Presidency

Not that I know anything about the subject, but this line is difficult

It was given the honour to provide the first President of the European Commission, former Prime Minister Jacques Santer. The current Prime Minister, Jean-Claude Juncker follows that tradition.

This wording suggests to me that Santer was the first President of the EC, and that Juncker is the current President. But the article President of the European Union makes lists Santer as the EC's 9th President, and does not mention Juncker at all. Could this be clarified by someone who understands the discrepancy? -Joshuapaquin 00:34, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

Problem possibly solved in today's edit? On September 10, 2004 Mr Juncker became the semi-permanent President of the group of finance ministers from the 12 countries that share the euro, a role dubbed "Mr Euro". -Joshuapaquin 05:17, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)

Glad I could help.

[edit] Language

Can somebody tell me what language is spoken in luxembourg? I read somewhere the official language is Letzeburgish( sorry for spelling) . I mean french, german , english, i get it but what do the people speak? If i were in Luxembourg city and wanted to go to public washrooms, what language would you suggest me using? 23:08, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)Xhami23:08, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That strongly depends on which people you incounter. There are for example 106000 people coming from abroad every day to work in Luxembourg. They will of course most likely speak their motherlanguage which will be in most cases French follwed by German. The foreign population can be divided into those that grew up here and those came here recently. The later of course will have no knowledge of Luxemburgish. They will, in a first attempt, learn the language that will be most usefull for them, which is french since it's the administrative language (if they don't speak it already). The first group consists mostly of Portuguese and Italiens, so people that speak a romanic language. For them learning French is much easier than learning Luxemburgish. As kids, they learn Luxemburgish of course through there social contacts in school. I have often overheard conversations of Portuguese teens in the bus that start with French or Luxembourgish and suddendly speak Portuguese when they don't want to be understood. For the people of Luxembourgish nationality, well for them living in Luxembourg is like living in Babel. In your family you speak Luxembourgish, with your friends too. You read your newspaper in German or French (both languages are used simulaneously in the same issue, but luckily never in the same article :-), you get your official letters/documents in French. You read the street names in French on the signs but in your mind you use the Luxembourgish one (the main reason why I am very rarely able to help any tourist to tell him where a specific street is). So what do you do when you go to a shop or public washroom? Use French! It's the language that works allways. Ironically, as a Luxembourger you automatically start talking French when you enter a shop since there are so many employees from France or Belgium (mentioned earlier) who work there. Soetimes you notice by the accent of the other person that he/she speaks Luxembourgish (happened to me several times). So if you are not completely confused yet try to get this: in our parliement, the member of parliements are all speaking Luxembourgish, he ministers are speaking French. So whenever a member of parliement is asking a minsiter, the question comes in Luxembourgish, the answer in French.

hope that I didn't confuse you too much. thom

Thanks a lot thom , i think your elaboration helped clarify this matter. so i got this right the native language is luxembourgish, and french is sort of government language. i didn't know that many people came to work everyday. Xhami

Added some content on the language. claudi

It's a tough one, since roughly 35% of the population aren't from Luxembourg. Wherever you go, where there's a crowd, you can be pretty sure that at least one person will be there who speaks French and one who speaks German, fluently. --JamesTheNumberless 12:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Xhami, if you look at the map, considering there's no problem these days going across borders in the EU, a commute to the centre of Luxembourg for a German or French resident is about the equivalent of the morning journey taken by a lot of Suburban residents around cities such as London, New York and Frankfurt. --JamesTheNumberless 12:51, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm English-speaking and planning to visit during a small Benelux holiday: given that I speak no French and small German from school some ten years ago, how am I going to get on? Fedgin 13:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Everybody learns English in secondary school. So you schould have no problems (at least with perople born after WWII).

I don't think one should call Luxemburgish people fluent in English. Most people (I'm not saying all) I've met there seem to have an awful grasp of English. If Luxembourg City wants to call itself a global city, I think a lot needs to be done to improve English language standards. I dare say even the French speak better English.

I strongly disagree. I might be biaised as I am luxembourgish too, but frankly ... the French are much worse on average.

Very funny discussion. But much more interesting would be the story why the Luxemburger were agreeing to add the french "o" to the name of their capital, their nation and most of their villages. Note: The orignal "Luxemburger" speaks German and is of german origin. Since 1900 less then 5% of the luxemburgish people understood an other language than german. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.211.243.225 (talk) 18:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Echternach

This place is described in the text as one of the 3 most important places in the country, yet it does not rate a mention on the map. How come? Cheers JackofOz 01:08, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That often happens. Echternach is historically important (second town in the middle ages, important abbey), but it's still a (very) small town (about 4000 people). I think the map used here is the map you can find in the article about Luxembourg at the CIA homepage. Have a look at the article Echternach for more information. PitterB(german wikipedia)

[edit] Soviet Republic?

I came across a suspicious (to a layman in Lux history) phrase:

After a 3-day period as a Soviet Socialist Republic in 1919...

A 30-minute web search did not provide independent confirmation of the fact. I looked into the history of the article and found that it was added by an anon on 16 Oc.2004 during a massive addition, so it is probably a valid one.

But the fact is of certain notoriety and requires some confirmation. Mikkalai 21:56, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

well, since the USSR was founded in 1922, i'd say it's a hoax.

cheers, thomas

I would guess so, but I was baffled by the fact that most of this section (that speaks about SSR) was added by the same anon, and most of the text still sits here. If SSR was a hoax, then the remaining facts thorough require scrutiny as well. Mikkalai 04:21, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As far as I remember from my school years, Luxembourg was never a republic. However the situation after WWI was as follows: The then Grand Duchess Marie-Adélaïde was very unpopular amongst the people because she was pro-german during the war (she tried to arrange herself with the occupant to remain in power, the reason why her sister had(!) to go to exile during WWII). After the war there was indeed a strong republican movement which resulted in a government crisis. The Luxembourgish people was asked by referendum whether they wanted to become a republic or whether the already mentioned sister of Marie-Adélaïde, Charlotte, should become Grand Duchess. No Frensh troups involved here, just democratic voting! But I have to admit, I was laughing a lot when I read about the SSR. Maybe we should place it under myths?

cheers Thom

But the quiestion still remains about the validity of the rest of this addition. What can you say? The guy could have slipped a joke or two more... Mikkalai 16:08, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This isn't a direct answer to the question of what happened in Luxembourg, but in the 19-teens, "Soviet Socialist Republic" was sort of a generic term that was used to denote a Communist government based on the model of revolutionary Russia. It doesn't necessarily mean that the country was somehow annexed to the USSR (which as you rightfully point out didn't exist at the time). Hungary's in 1919 short-lived Communist government called itself the "Hungarian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic"; the same year, an attempted revolution in Munich proclaimed the "Bavarian Soviet Republic". --Jfruh 15:01, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Well yes, soviet means nothing more than workers' council, and a soviet republic is supposed to be a country where esp. the economy is not controlled by capitalists but democratically run by workers' councils (in the Soviet union, they were bodies of direct popular democracy before the Bolsheviks took power away from them).

I hadn't heard of Luxembourg being a soviet replic before and I think it's probably an exaggeration, but I found the following text by Luxembourg historian Léon Raths [5]:

An Däitschland huet et staark geramouert. Den däitsche Keeser Wëllem II., deen de Krich ugefaangen hat, huet missen zrécktrieden an den 11. November 1918 gouf am berühmte Waggon zu Compiègne d'Enn vum Krich ënnerschriwwen.

Awer och zu Lëtzebuerg huet et geramouert! Et hat sech grad ewéi an Däitschland een Aarbeechter an Zaldoterot forméiert, dee ganz stiermesch eng Volléksrepublik ausruffe wollt.

Den 19. November 1918 sin déi lescht däitsch Truppen duerch Lëtzebuerg gezunn an den 20. November sin déi éischt Amerikaner am Süde vum Land an den 21. November déi éischt Fransousen zu Ell an d'Land amarschéiert. [...]

D'Franzousen sin den 22. November zu Lëtzebuerg agezunn an de Maréchal Foch war de 25. November zu Lëtzebuerg, wou hie säi "Quartier-général" opgeschloen huet.

I won't translate the whole thing, but basically it says the following: at the end of WW1 there were increasing revolutionary tendencies. In Luxembourg a workers' and soldiers' council was formed that planned to proclaim a people's republic (Volleksrepublik), similar to events taking place in Germany. WW1 ended on 11. November 1918 ; on 19. November the last German troops withdrew from Luxembourg ; from 21. November the first US troops started arriving ; on 22. November French troops marched into Luxembourg, from 25. under Maréchal Foch. In other words, between 19. and 22. there would have been a brief window of three days without foreign occupiers to put down the revolutionary workers' and soldiers' council. So I'd conclude, it's not a hoax but probably a bit of an exaggeration. - pir 00:59, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

It is an exaggeration that Luxembourg was an SSR. It was only a declaration made in Luxembourg-city by several socialist politicians who tried to use the mutiny (due to low wages) of the small armed forces (called volunteer’s company, around 200 or 300 soldier) on January 9th 1919. But the government was still in place and the situation calmed down as French troupes arrived (Foche’s headquarter was at that time in Luxembourg). But this "movement" had no sympathy in the population as the referendum of 1919 showed. PitterB (coming from german wikipedia)

[edit] Merge from Luxembourg

Luxembourg article now has a huge "history" section, which must be merged into History of Luxembourg, while the section should be made into a summary. Mikkalai 04:40, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Done. Please revise for redundancies, spelling errors and factual problems. klodi

[edit] Portuguese minority

"10% of the population is of Portuguese extraction" -- How did Luxembourg come to have such a huge minority of Portuguese? Was it due to historic or recent immigrations? --Menchi 14:37, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

It's due to Portuguese workers in the Luxembourg EU bureaucracy. Recent immigrations. Since the wages are much higher in Luxembourg many came and chose to stay. Jakro64 07:15, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Where did you get that rubbish? Most Portuguese in Luxembourg are simple workers!

Most Portuguese people came to Luxembourg as simple workers in the 1950s. Nowadays they live there in the second and third generation and are nearly completly integrated.

Those are not Portuguese but Luxembourgers! We do allow people to recieve our nationality. It's not sacret or something.

Well, not all choose to get the luxemburgisch nationality. Some wish to remain portuguese.

The problem is the Luxembourgish nationality law. In Luxembourg, you are not allowed to have another nationality besides the Luxembourgish one. As a result, many second-generation immigrants (incl. myself) do not bother to ask for the Luxembourgish nationality. BTW, to answer the other question, most Portuguese are indeed workers, but the wages for workers are much much higher in Luxembourg than the wages for comparable jobs in Portugal. Luis rib 17:07, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Secular?

Luxembourg is a secular state, but the state recognises certain religions as officially-mandated religions. This gives the state a hand in religious administration and appointment of clergy, in exchange for which the state pays certain running costs and wages.

These sentences are self-contradicting. 193.171.121.30 08:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

A secular government does not use religion as a source of law, dictate religious teachings, or discriminate on the grounds of religion. However, secular governments can still support religious institutions financially and/or engage in administrative tasks (for example, France does just that, even outside Alsace-Moselle). Bastin 10:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

According to the article Secular state, a secular state does not support any particular religious belief or practice (and that would also be my understanding of secularism). 193.171.121.30 11:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Secularlity is largely disputed locally. Whatever the laws may say the fact is that christian religions are priviledged, the roman catholic one particularly. Until relatively recently many families had no choice but to send their children to religious class (which is really christian dogma as it's held by priests or christian lay people) as their schools were not offering ethics classes (which are supposed to exist). I actually went through much of the same, at first forced into religion classes as no ethics classes existed, then after some protest having a free hour instead... It should also be noticed that there still is no convention with the local muslim communities yet (in essence the government requests them to solve their shism). A small group (of which I'd consdider myself a supporter) of people is constantly asking for secularity to be finally instored, but considering the close ties between the main governing party (except for a few years they've been in government since WWII) and the local catholic church this is not likely to happen anytime soon.--Caranorn 12:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

In that perspective it might be interesting to observe the phenomenon of the Octave in Luxembourg where we have a pilgrimage to the Holy Virgin in the Cathedral of Luxembourg City. During the end procession the government and Grand Duke take part in the procession. They do so NOT as provate persons but in their function as politicians. So, yes the question whether Luxembourg is really a secular state according to a international definition is not so easily answered. Amen Spanish Inquisition 17:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I think that makes the answer quite easy: No, Luxembourg is not a secular state. 193.171.121.30 00:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] European Union

Isn't Luxembourg one of the three "capitals" of the EU, with things like the European Court of Justice? Isn't this worthy of note? I couldn't see any reference to this role in the EU. Walkerma 02:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The EU doesn't have 'capitals'; instead, its institutions and agencies have seats (in the same way as the UN). In that respect, Luxembourg City is the seat of the European Court of Justice, the European Investment Bank, the European Court of Auditors, and the secretariat of the European Parliament. It may be worth noting in passing, but its really a matter for Luxembourg (city), where it will be covered in due course. Bastin 12:17, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll trust that you will insert the relevant phrase. I note that the article on Belgium mentions the EU HQ in its introduction. And please forgive my blurring the boundaries between city and country! 03:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I've entered a sentence in the introduction. Another reference could be made in the history section. Bastin 11:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Luxembourg's location in Europe

The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg [...] is a small landlocked country in the north-west of continental Europe, [...]
I've changed the location to Western Europe since Continental Europe has different definitions. I'm still not really satisfied, but without the Scandinavian Peninsula half of central Europe (f.e. Poland) is in the north. See image:Europe_countries_map_en.png to understand my reasons. --32X 04:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I really don't understand your complaint. Both definitions of Continental Europe include Luxembourg. Poland is a false analogy, as it is not located in 'northern Continental Europe' by the predominant definition.

Furthermore, if one sees the article on Western Europe, one would see that describing Luxembourg as simply being in 'Western Europe' is pointless, as the term covers most of Europe. The preferred term ought to be 'Low Countries'; unfortunately, for some unknown reason, the Wikipedia article claims that it's only used in historical contexts (which is wrong) and recommends using the term 'Benelux' (which is like saying that it's located in the western European Union). Bastin 09:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] cemetery where American soldiers are interred

What's the hold-up with regard to any effort to return interred American soldiers -- including General George Patton -- to the United States? Luxembourg is such a small nation that the inhabitants might be glad to have all those remains removed. Beadtot 02:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

By arrangement with the next of kin, it has been illegal to re-inter the War Dead from either of the World Wars since 1951, and there's never been a serious attempt to disturb the Glorious Dead or to denigrate their dedication and courage by changing that policy. Every single serviceman buried in ABMC cemeteries, including that at Hamm, is interred with the agreement of the Fallen's next of kin, each of which was given a choice of three options: interment near the battlefield, interment in a military cemetery in the US, or interment in a private or municipal cemetery of the family's stipulation. Those that believe that all US servicemen should be buried on US soil don't realise that the next of kin think otherwise, and a free country recognises that decision, particularly as their husbands, fathers, sons, and brothers died to guarantee that freedom. Bastin 09:13, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

And in particular it was Patton (not a great man in my mind, but that's irrelevant here) himself who asked to be buried near his men. I'm not sure he considered that to be Hamm in particular, but it would logically have been in either Luxembourg or Belgium (as he had his greatest command here and also the greatest casualties). And I don't really see what benefit we'd have for having that cemetery dissolved, I'm pretty sure the grounds would remain consecrated and be turned into a WWII monument. All such a removal would do would be antagonise those locals who now wish to retain at least some friendship with the United States.--Caranorn 12:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the next-of-kin thought that the "tour of duty" participants would be returned alive and in luxury, to live out their last days with close family contact and eventual interment in family plots. 00:32, 4 September 2006 (UTC) beadtot

Oh, give me a break. Luxembourg would still be a German enclave if the US hadn't sacrificed hundreds of thousands of its soldiers to de-Nazifi Europe. A cemetery honoring those foreign soldiers who came to *your* country's aid in its time of need shouldn't raise any ire to you.

Are you shure? Wouldn't it be a Soviet state? I mean the Red Army was pretty effective too and it was them who conquered Berlin. Still, I cannot see either why we should "hand back" these soldiers. Especially since most of the next-of-kin are older than 60 by now and are naturally dying out anyway. Merry Christmas Spanish Inquisition 17:10, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] National sport

One area where this article is lacking is that of sport. This is despite sport (mostly football, for which I take the credit/blame) being one of the better documented areas of Luxembourgian life. However, whilst considering what to put in the 'Sport' section (which would be a subsection of 'Culture'), I wondered what Luxembourg's national sport is. The article on national sports claims that it's football, but it seems that Luxembourg is a lot more prominent in the world of cycling. Which one is it? Bastin 17:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd say the question is what is easier to achieve. Have one professional cyclist or 22 professional football (cosser) players. I'd say that football definitelly is the national sport, probablyly closely followed by basketball now. Of course cycling has a long tradition, but there are far fewer clubs and I assume far fewer licensed members. Other types of popular sports are volleyball, handball, table tennis (ping pong), light athletics (not sure what the correct english name is), swimming... Rare but existing sports (organised that is) are among others ice hockey, rugby, american football... And I didn't even consider motor sports, or sports like billiard (a world champion (several years in sequence)), bowling... But honestly I'm not well placed to help much with any (I was quite sportive as a youth but never licensed in any sport). Finally I'd say number of licenses should determine what is considered a national sport and I'm pretty sure football is still no. 1.

On a different and totally unrelated note. I went to town today to take some relevant photoes for various articles about Luxembourg-City. I will probably upload and link them in wherever needed tommorrow. I have also checked out a number of armorials at the national library and will start work on a set of coats of arms to use on the commune pages. Though it is likely I won't be doing them in any particular order (I will create coats of arms of medieval noble families at the same time, but don't think I will upload those before I've written their relevant articles). Oh and I will try to do this work for the entire region (at least well across the belgian border) not just Luxembourg.--Caranorn 21:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

remember: tomorrow is in 4 minutes!! So hurry up! Spanish Inquisition 21:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Yep;-) Tommorrow as in early afternoon (today), I spent the entire evening browsing through those armorials.--Caranorn 22:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Current monarchies

Argh messed up last edit summary. Basically Category:Current monarchies does not contain countries. You will see for example it contains British monarchy, rather than the United Kingdom. Tim! 22:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, understood:-).--Caranorn 11:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Could somebody please remove the "Luxenburgers (note the spelling mistake) are food, I like to eat them, WHIPPPPEEEEEEE" quote after the language section. Some idiot was obviously having a laugh. 81.132.49.93 21:01, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Size

Is it true that Luxembourg is about the same size as Rhode Island? I'm not sure if I believe that, why would a country be that small? I do think that it's at least the smallest country though.--Emokid200618 22:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Definitelly not the smallest country though this is no place to debate about such. Take a look at Monaco, San Marino, Liechtenstein, Andorra, Vatican etc. And I only listed European countries there.--Caranorn 12:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Is it true that the United States is about the same size as the continent of Europe? Why would a country be that large? It must be at least the largest country though. Andreret 10:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

So how big is Rhode Island? Why would I know how big a fiftieth of the U.S. is? Is it really a good size-metaphor if I have to look something else up just to find out how big Luxembourg is? Maybe it should be changed? How 'bout: if the earth were the size of a golf-ball, Luxembourg would be the size of a carbon-atom on its survace. Or, if the United States of America were a pair of buttocks, Luxembourg would be the size of a mole. Or perhaps: Luxembourg is so small, we had to put in a picture of Europe instead of a picture of Luxembourg because it wouldn't fit.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.151.162.247 (talk) 04:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

• Among Americans, areas are measured by a peculiar, but easily-learned, system of units:
  • One Fotomat = 125 m².
  • One football field = 42.82 Fotomats.
  • One Rhode Island = 25.152 megaFotomats = 587.3 kilo-football fields.
• Luxembourg, at 20.69 megaFotomats, has an area of 0.823 Rhode Islands.

Just as with Rhode Island ... it may be small, but most people wouldn't enjoy having to walk it. :) --7Kim 05:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Map

I would argue that Luxembourg should not be the one and only EU country article on Wikipedia that has a map not showing the EU and Lux's position within it. The sole objector to this so far appears to be Bastin; can we have a discussion based on objective criteria about it? The issue is that (1) the map Bastin8 re-inserts is exactly the same but shows Lux as a circle rather than a shape, and removes the EU (2) infoboxes are not only to do with the article you are on at any given time - they also contain information about related groups of pages (3) the maps are harmonised across all EU countries so that any casual browser of EU pages can immediately see how they all relate and be reminded that they are all in the EU, which is the most important international organisation those countries belong to. Other views? MarkThomas 10:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, actually, you're wrong on a number of counts:

1) I'm not the sole objector. WikiProject Countries rejected your proposal. In fact, of the three options presented, yours came dead LAST, with only seven votes in favour (cf. 15 for the old maps and 13 for that without EU highlighting).

2) The maps depict Luxembourg identically. The EU shading is the only difference.

3) The maps aren't harmonised across EU pages. There have been periodic rejections of your personal policy in a number of articles; the articles on Latvia, Malta, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom all currently reject your idea, and many others have done so in the past or are in the process of revert wars.

We could have a discussion about the merits of each of the maps, but that's already been held. And, it should be said, lost by the pan-European POV-pushers. Bastin 11:59, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Votes on Wikipedia are not binding, and anyway it was not nearly as clear-cut as you present, and in any event the great majority of EU country article pages now have the new map anyway - why on earth should Luxembourg be different?! Also the EU shading is not the only difference, and also both Spain and Malta have variants of the new map. Apart from all that, you are correct! Apart from the "POV-pushers" bit. :-) MarkThomas 12:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Just as Luxembourg The Netherlands does not have and does not want the new map as it stands now. No consensus is reached either in the WikiProject Countries nor on the Netherlands talk page. Arnoutf 13:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it would be better to achieve consensus at the WikiProject Countries page, so I agree about that aspect, and that's why harmonising is better than every POVist map editor and nationalist Euro-hater with a grudge going off and creating their own country maps, which until the new maps were available is basically what has been happening. MarkThomas 13:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I do prefer MarkThomas's map. The EU is after all a political reality - if you like it or not. Also, Luxembourg is one of the most europhile countries - it was one of the only ones (with spain, i believe) to approve the EU constitution during a referendum. Also, it is the seat of several EU organisms, like the European Court of Justice. I can understand the fuss this map is creating on the UK page, but not on the Luxembourg page...presumably not a lot of Luxembourgers are actually aware of the issue. Luis rib 20:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed it would be nice to hear from some Luxemburgers on the point - the user most opposed to the Euro maps appears to be of British origin judging from his home page. MarkThomas 21:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm a Luxembourger and I just had to revert the addition as this should be discussed first. It seems to be that the current additions are the contrary of harmonization as it's simply pushing a new map to replace an old one. The EU is not the only international organisation Luxembourg belongs to, it's also clearly not the most important one (I'd consider the UN most important). The constitution referendum (in which I was among the ~46% to vote no, not against the EU but against a constitution that was insufficient to protect social standards in the EU and at the same time would have been written in stone (almost unchangeable)) is also entirely irrelevant as that was not about membership in the EU.--Caranorn 22:02, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm a Portuguese born and living in Luxembourg. The EU is certainly the most important organisation Luxembourg is a member of, since most of the laws nowadays derive directly from some EU directives (funnily enough, the laws and circulars emitted by Lux. authorities which I have to use in my job are quite often copy-paste versions of the relevant EU directive). The current map has been accepted by contributors of most other EU countries; only in the UK and here there seems to be such a fuss about the map. Therefore this is truly harmonization: the tacit majority (including new member Romania and Bulgaria) seem to have accepted the map - so it should be included here too notwithstanding the particular wishes of contributors to this page. Luis rib 22:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Check vote at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#A final solution for the entire maps issue.3F, also discussion at Talk:European Union (where we probably should continue the debate. --Caranorn 22:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Location maps available for infoboxes of European countries

[edit] "Climate"?

Regarding the Luxembourg City climate.PNG image, how is this called climate? Climate infers at least 30 years of weather...what gives? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.201.229.248 (talk) 10:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] the art of majerus

To start with, Kutter is of course written with a K. And since the Tate Gallery made a exhibition on him, i'd say he was good enough to be named here along with the two others. [6] [7]

cheers Spanish Inquisition 15:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

That'd be good enough;-). I was just a bit worried about the Majerus "trend", interestingly enough he is not at all popular among local artists. But if it can be backed up with a source like the two you give above, it's fine by me.--Caranorn 13:18, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New European vector maps

You're invited to discuss a new series of vector maps to replace those currently used in Country infoboxes: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#New European vector maps. Thanks/wangi 13:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Abandoned its policy of neutrality?

From the article... "During World War II, Luxembourg abandoned its policy of neutrality, when it joined the Allies in fighting Germany." This doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since it had already been invaded by Germany, and self-defense is not usually considered to violate a neutrality policy. (E.g. Switzerland had plans in both WWI and WWII to work with the French if the Germans invaded.) Should there be a source and/or a clearer explanation for this sentence? -- Eye of Sauron 18:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Luxembourg's neutrality is usually assumed to have ended when its constitutional amendment to that effect was made (28 April 1948), and I suggest that it be changed to reflect the fact that, whilst it did fight in the Second World War on the side of the Allies, it was still constitutionally-bound to neutrality for another few years. This either refers to the actual combat (which is a fallacy, as is evident in the Switzerland example) or to Luxembourg signing the Atlantic Charter (24 September 1941). Bastin 18:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Coat of Arms

I am currently in the process of turning the coat of arms of Luxembourg into an SVG (yes, you did read that right!). I just thought I'd mention it here in case anyone else was thinking of doing it. CarrotMan 07:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question about largest production company in Europe

Just wondering if that is false as BBC is the largest production company in the world and England is in Europe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.191.19 (talk) 15:12, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

• RTL is the Europe's largest TV and Radio Broadcaster in Europe with 42 TV channels and 32 Radio stations in 10 countries. It is the world's leader in terms of Content (Production & Rights) with over 10,000 hours of programming per year and more than 300 programmes in 22 countries. It also produces number one prime-time shows for major broadcasters in almost every major TV market in the world. It is finally the largest independent distribution company outside the US and holds broadcasting rights for 19,000 programming hours in 150 countries worldwide. The BBC is the largest broadcaster in the world in terms of audience numbers and revenue. Being the largest worldwide doesn't make you the largest on the European market. --Scotchorama (talk) 14:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Luxembourg or Luxemburg?

Why are we using the French spelling?Cameron Nedland (talk) 22:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit request

{{editprotected}}

Please add {{main|History of Luxembourg}} to the "History of Luxembourg" section. 12:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Y Done Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 12:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Latin Europe

Hello Luxembourg! There is a vote going on at Latin Europe that might interest you. Please everyone, do come and give your opinion and votes. Thank you. The Ogre (talk) 20:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)