Talk:Utrecht (city)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following style choices were made in the history of the article :

please conform to these choices when editing, or achieve a consensus for change on this talk page first.

Contents

[edit] Buildings on the Uithof

I've made an (incomplete) list of buildings on the Uithof, i.e. the scientist they are named after. However, I don't know much about all of them, nor do I know if there are wiki articles on these people. Please help to fix the links and add the full names.

Thanks, Eef (A) 12:55, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I've extended the list a bit and moved it to the article on De Uithof, for more information about the names of the buildings see [the webpage of Utrecht University on this subject] (in Dutch). sietse 21:15, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] City on the Rhine

Utrecht has been on the Rhine for a long time. Does it really belong in that category? ---moyogo

I guess you mean off the Rhine, which is kind of correct as the main bedding of the Rhine has shifted to the south. The original Roman fortress was on the main Rhine flow, the 'Oude Gracht' once was the Rhine. Small rivers, split from the Rhine still flow into Utrecht are still called kromme rijn (bent rhine) and Leidse Rijn (rhine). The Rhine has never played such an explicit name-role as in Germany, as it splits into multiple rivers about 2 kilometers past the German Dutch border. The main flow is called Waal (at Nijmegen), renamed Lek, Nieuwe Maas and Nieuwe Waterweg (near Rotterdam). The Rhine from then on is called Nederrijn, Nether Rhine and is much smaller. So this seems a bit arbitrary, to place any Dutch cities (as goes for other dutch cities except Arnhem).

I would suggest to Remove Utrecht from this category if anyone feels the category becomes overcrowded.---Arnoutf

[edit] Transport

I removed a reference to traffic jams due to lagging road construction, as this is in my opinion a point of view. Traffic congestion in the Netherlands may as well be the results of decades of lagging public transport construction, in conjection with budget cuts on public transport; and neglect of possibillities of bikes in local transport (as this is also a pov, I would suggest not to refer to either). Arnoutf 20:42, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Figures on History section

We may want to add some other figures to the history section. Especially the 'liberation' picture for Utrecht is referred to by only 1 sentence, and as no fighting occurred and liberation was only after surrender. Perhaps another picture from Utrechts history may be better suited?? Arnoutf 11:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)



I would agree with the need to add more people to the history section, it's a bit painful to see Henk Westbroek on the list.


[edit] Werven

Shouldn't there be something about why the canal structure is so unique. Wouldn't it be better if somebody explained that the Utrecht Canals have werven and what that is. I do not know what the English term is for werven and werfkelders, nor do I know how to explain it in one sentence, but saying it is unique without explaining why seems silly.

[edit] Oudgracht a canal?

I am not sure whether Canal is the best translation of the use of Gracht in the Utrecht situation. OudGracht used to be natural bedding of the Rhine, it was canalised, but IMHO is not a true canal (kanaal) - ( except of course the northern section from Langeie straat to Weertsluis). This situation is completely different from the Amsterdam situation where circular canals (grachten) were dug and no natural flows existed beforehand. That the word is the same in Dutch does not mean it needs be the same in English (after all (slot)gracht is translated moat not canal). Anyone another option? Arnoutf 15:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evil and a Heathen

Utrecht is mentioned in the song Evil and a Heathen by Scottish indie rock band Franz Ferdinand from their 2005 album You Could Have It So Much Better. Is this worth a mention in the article? --Guus Hoekman 21:54, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

May be interesting is it has a large importance in the song, if it is just mentioned in a line somewhere through, I think it is not truly relevant. Will listen to the song one of these days. Arnoutf 07:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
It's really just in one line and has little importance. The lyrics go: "trecht led me to the Sacre Coeur". I checked the article on Sacre Coeur and it's mentioned there. Guus Hoekman 02:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I added it in a subsection trivia under culture. I think anyay that the culture section maybe expanded (more on music, and theaters and galleria's; now is very much museum focussed).Arnoutf 10:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Retrieval date

I have noticed a lot of red links in the references section. The only right way to add a retrieval date is like this: accessdate=2008-01-06. Thank you. Baldrick90 (talk) 21:25, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I noticed them myself, but after formatting the whole bunch did not have the stamina to complete that detail. Arnoutf (talk) 16:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dutch Water Line

The article states several times that Utrecht was part of the Dutch Water Line of the 17th century. The Dutch article about the Dutch Water Line states that Utrecht was not a part of it. Also, I have read quite a few about the history of Utrecht, but I have never read that it was part of the Dutch water line. A quick search on google gives this map which clearly shows that Utrecht was not a part of the Dutch water line. So I am going to remove the lines. --Merijn2 (talk) 00:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC) I have also removed the French Age section because it only dealt with th creation of the Zocher park, which did not occur in the French age and which is dealt with later in the text anyway —Preceding unsigned comment added by Merijn2 (talk • contribs) 00:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Did you have a look at the English article at Dutch Water Line? It shows a clear map of the New Dutch Water Line, of which Utrecht was the central point. Classical geographer (talk) 10:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I was too quick. Your edit did just that - remove the reference to the Old Line and focus on the New Line. Good work. Classical geographer (talk) 10:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
In the old line Utrecht was an integrated part as a fortified town (much like Naarden). In the New Line, a new set of fortress (a.o. Rhijnauwen) was constructed east of Utrecht. Utrecht was no longer part of the actual defense system, and the walls could be demolished. Arnoutf (talk) 17:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you reference that? Cause I looked it up in the only book I have on the history of Utrecht, and that states " the (old) Dutch water line ran west of Utrecht". The book is called "historische Atlas van de stad Utrecht" and is not really scientific so if you have a more academic source then I'll undo my edit. If I would have more time, which I don't, I would go to the library and search for more academic sources to see what they say about it. --Merijn2 (talk) 00:14, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, I've done some more research on google on "oude hollandse waterlinie" and every page that has a map of the old Dutch waterline has a map similar to the one I linked to above. In every description of it it is mentioned that it ran via Woerden and Utrecht is not mentioned. It seems that it is the whole of the internet versus Arnoutf on this issue so please tell me, what is your source? You've done a great job with this article and you deserve a lot of praise for it but you have to give some evidence on this matter because I just don't believe you on your word alone.--Merijn2 (talk) 00:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Ok I maybe wrong, will try to find out how it works. What I know for sure is that during the time of the Old Water Line, Utrecht was a fortified city; whether that fortified city was actually part of the defenses of the Waterline, or that it was fortified because of the city lying east of the lines (and hence being unprotected by it) seems to be the issue. I have to admit, I thought it was part, but seeing your evidence I think I was probably wrong. Thanks for correcting me there. Arnoutf (talk) 08:14, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I checked. You are right. The Old Water Line existed between 1672 and 1815 and ran west of Utrecht; this left Utrecht depending on its own defenses, (ie a fortified city-but not part of the Waterline). The New Waterlinie is slightly east of Utrecht. Utrecht was never a fortified city in either. The 1815 move to the west allowed Utrecht to demolish its city defenses in 1827. Note that the Utrecht Lunetten, Fort de Klop and Fort de Gagel were outside of Utrecht when they were constructed +\- 150 years ago.
Thanks for correcting this, this is one of the things that makes Wiki a good thing; errors of editors being caught and corrected by others. Arnoutf (talk) 22:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)