Talk:Bruges/Archive 1

Archive 1

Early comments

"The first book in English ever printed is thought to have been published here." Can someone give particulars? Mark K. Jensen 08:55, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

Can some fix the formatting of the article? The history section is obscured by the photograph. I would fix it if I could. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vonsnip (talk • contribs) 19:03, 8 July 2005 (UTC)

the peasants are revolting!

What on earth is going on? The word peasant seems to have been substituted for a great number of other words, rendering the article undreadable. i'd fix it, but I don't know what it's supposed to say. someobody help

The meaning of Brugge is much simpler

"Brugge (a name probably signifying landing stage)"

Probably not. Brugge is just old Flemish dialect for the word brug, which means bridge in English. Brugge is also know as the Venice of the north because the town has a lot of canals, and, as a consequence, an awful lot of bridges. Hence the name.

I agree. The modern Dutch for bridge is brug and the plural is bruggen. In Afrikaans, decended from Dutch, bridge is also brug and bridges can be either brûe or brugge. Perhaps in the old dialect it did mean "landing stage" but in the modern decendant languages it is certainly more like "bridges".

I agree. Therefore, in the first paragraph the "literal" translation of "Zeebrugge" should be "Seabridges", not "Seabrugge".

> I do not agree. Brugge is not an old Flemish word, but it's an old Scandinavian word which indeed means landing stage, or more accurate 'fordable place'.

Indented line - I disagree. Where's your evidence that a Flemish town would be given an old Scandinavian name, rather than a Flemish one? Both languages are of Germanic descent in any case. The Flemish "brug" (pluralized as "bruggen", and pronounced "brugge" even today) has more likely links to the Germanic "brücken" for bridges. While it is true that this land was all watery swamp before the canals were finished, and towns in this region are more often named for a tiny but vital fords (like bridges and dams), why bring the Scandinavians into it? All the languages in this region have common Germanic roots.

You couldn't be more wrong :-) It's historically and etymologically proven that the name comes from the Scandinavian word bryggja and has nothing to do with the word for "bridge". In that case the city would be called something like Brigge instead of Brugge. Le Fou (talk) 12:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that anyone is wrong here. Bridge and landing stage seem to me to mean practically the same thing and since the germanic and scandinavian words for these same (or at least very similar) things are also very similar then it doesn't seem like a massive leap to assume that the two words are related in someway and quite likely developed together or in parallel over the many centuries that we have been developing our dialects... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.174.222.110 (talk) 22:26, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I do not think that the etymology can be Scandinavian, because it would mean that Scandinavian was the spoken language in Bruge or around it. The toponyms are remains of old languages that were spoken in older time and the local inhabitants, who were Dutch speaking, would not have changed their habit to call it with the name of a foreign language they did not understand. It does not make sense. Was Brugge a Scandinavian colony with a majority of Old Norse speakers that could justify the changing of the traditional Dutch name ? As far as I know, it is not the case. There are many examples of well-known Scandinavian settlements in northern Europe and in places where they stayed for a long time, the local population continued to use their traditional names. Very often in places where they were much more numerous the Scandinavians had their own version of the local name, but it almost never replaced the local one. A city like York, a very famous Viking settlement with remains of their long presence and their assimilation, they changed a bit the name from Eoforwic to Jorvik. Other cities have Old Norse names used among Scandinavians and sometimes in the places they dominated f.e. djuprlindr reproduces Dublin, that is itself from dubh linn in Gaelic, Wicklow that is named after its English name (itself from Old Norse) is known in Irish as Chill Mhantáin. They correspond to real settlements but not Brugge.Nortmannus (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Le Fou : << It's historically and etymologically proven that the name comes from the Scandinavian word bryggja and has nothing to do with the word for "bridge".>> Sources ? I mean, serious one. I have just checked the Icelandic names for the European cities, because the Icelandic language is the most conservative Scandinavian language and very close to the language spoken by the Vikings. Still today it uses alternate typical Icelandic names (sometimes, together with the "European" one) for numerous European cities :

• Brugge and Bryggja
• London and Lundúnir
• Dyflinn and Dublin
• Edinborg (Edinburgh)
• York and Jórvík
• Rúðuborg and Rúða (Rouen)

Does it mean that they derive from Old Norse ? obviously not, they are only Scandinavian interpretations of the medieval European city names. The only one that descends directly from the Old Norse interpretation is York : Eborakon > Eboracu(m) > Eofor-wiċ > Járvik > York, but its etymological root keeps staying Celtic. Why should Brugge share the same process as York ? York and Yorkshire were significant Scandinavian settlements under the Danelaw and all the toponymy is printed by Scandinavian place-names elements and the local English tongue too, Brugge was nothing like that. Moreover, Brugge would be the single one to have a Scandinavian etymology ? Strange isn't it ? Nortmannus (talk) 08:21, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

According to English Etymology by T. F. Hoad and Das Herkunftswörterbuch, Duden, the words for "bridge" in the different Germanic languages are all related to each other and have about the same meanings, in general "structure forming a passageway between two points" OE bryċġ > bridge, Old Saxon bruggia, Old High German brucca, Old Norse bryggja from Common Germanic *bruʒjō. The Islandic name Bryggja is simply a translation of West Germanic (which dialect ?) word for "bridge". Concerning the evolution of Old English [y] to [i], it is a typical English one (and Frisian, probably). Old English and Old Frisian belong together and alone to the same subgroup of West Germanic languages called Anglo-Frisian and Brugge was never located in the extension zone of English and Frisian languages.Nortmannus (talk) 09:01, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Medieval buildings

There is no such thing in Bruges as truly "medieval" architecture. First, one could dispute the termini ab quo and ad quem of the Medieval Ages, in this case, I would say that the terminus ad quem would be the late 15th century.

Second, most buildings date back well after the 15th century. Most were build in the 17th - 20th century. But the 19th century defined the current 'architectural look' of the city. Yet, truly "medieval" buildings are probably the churches (Saint Salvator, Our Lady Church, Jerusalem Church, etc.) although these were constructed and heavily modified over time.

Even the belfry was erected in several phases and it's current state doesn't resemble how it looked in i.e. the 14th century (to be exact, the belfry burned down in 1281 and was reconstructed later on).

Other monuments like those around the 'Burg' date back to the 18th and 19th century and the former 'Medieval' Sint-Donaas church that would dominate the Burg, was demolished during the French Revolution.

So, in retrospect: Bruges is rather a palette of different architectural styles from different periodes then a truly "medieval only" city. A faux feature that's being played out quite well nonetheless in order to attract tourists worldwide.

Economy

What are other major industries in Brugges besides tourism?

Zeebrugge, part of the municipality of Bruges, is the second largest port of Belgium, and is of major economic importance. Fram 19:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Map

A lot of cities on the English Wikipedia lack a map. I would have thought this would be very important, as many people search for cities trying to find out their location. Might I suggest adding the Map from the German article de:Brügge. (I don't know how to add images :(.. ) 124.177.36.245 09:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I've added the map now. I don't know if the location of the map in the article is good enough, feel free to make it more artistically pleasing of course... Fram 10:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Bruges/ Brugge

Downes51 recently altered all refs from "Bruges" to "Brugge", with the comment "Nobody refers to Brugge as Bruges except Francophones and those English who know no better." Maybe, but this is English wiki and I would argue its first audience is English speaking. Everyone I know here in Britain refers to the town as "Bruges" and when looking for info would expect it to be listed under that name and use it in its text. A minority of Brits are aware of the language issue in Belgium. Those who are aware, try to be respectful (helped by the widespread comprehension of English), but still refer to "Bruges" - much in the same as we refer to "Munchen" as "Munich", "Roma" as "Rome", etc. I argue that it's improper to impose a relatively unfamiliar and unused term, without debate and consensus; it's just unfortunate that our original perception of Flanders was through Francophones. Folks at 137 18:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree - while I use "Brugge" myself, "Bruges" is the accepted English name. -- Ian Dalziel 00:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I'm puzzled that you cancelled my edits changing Bruges to Brugge (pronounced Brooker). For the last 5 years I've lived in Flanders on and off, and it's a simple fact that I've never heard it called Bruges, neither will you see Bruges on a road sign anywhere within Belgium. It is also a fact that referring to Flanders (ie Flemish-speaking) towns by their French names is very irritating to local sensibilities. Calling Brugge "Bruges" makes as much sense as calling London "Londres"! downes51

Several points on this:

1. Francophiles can call London what they like - if the French for London is Londres, that's ok, I have no right to comment on or criticise French usage
2. This is English language Wilipedia: "Bruges" is the English for "Brugge", as Munich is for Munchen, Rome for Roma, Dunkirk for Dunkerque, etc
3. I was in Bruges this year and when we were spoken to in English, "Bruges" was used
4. The official municipal English-language website refers to "Bruges"
5. I'm sure that all Belgian main road signs are bilingual as in Bruges/Brugge, Ypres/Ieper, Namur/Namen, etc - but I can't argue on this one
6. Have a look at [1]
7. Flemish colleagues tell me they speak Dutch, not Flemish. They were very definite about this.

No offence is intended, I just get irritated when told how to use my own language. Folks at 137 19:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

No offence intended either (and not taken). We are just going to have to disagree about this. But in relation to your above points (1) I'm sure you mean Francophones not Francophiles, but in any event my intention was to point out how silly it would be for we Brits to refer to our capital as Londres! The French can use whatever word they like amongst themselves. (2 and 3) You are right, but we are all wrong. Mumbai was Bombay until very recently for example. The process of public education cannot start early enough and this is as good a place as any. (5) You will just have to take my word for this.... in Flanders the road signs are all in Flemish (or Dutch if you prefer!), and in the Ardennes (Wallonia) they are all in French. Even in Brussel which is technically in Flanders (in fact it's the capital but French speakers are probably more abundant) you will see no road signs in any other language than Flemish. And the instant you cross the boundary from Vlaams-Brabant to Brabant-Wallonie the signs directing you to 'Namen' suddenly change to Namur. Driving north the signs change from Anvers to Antwerpen. It's just the way it is. In the 1970s when I used to travel on these roads for the first time the signs were bi-lingual. But what used to happen was that Vlaams-speakers would use black paint to obliterate the French placenames. And then the French-speakers would do the same with the Flemish words with the result that all the road signs ended up completely black! It seemed quite funny really, but the political settlement arrived at since then has (IMO) arrived at a workable compromise. I'm new here, hope this isn't too long. Downes51

Usage in Flanders is not relevant here since this is an English encyclopedia. This being said, the guideline of using the English version of a city’s name when it exists may not always be the best one to follow either, as exemplified by Beijing instead of Peking and Mechelen instead of Mechlin. In both those examples, usage by Anglophones is what counts rather than the existence of an English translation. Although there is no good measure for usage, the “Language Tools” offered by Google could be used as a substitute. Warning: just specifying “pages written in English” is not sufficient as there are still many non-English pages that are somehow picked up. By specifying both “pages written in English” and “pages located in” a mostly Anglophone country (UK, USA, Ireland, Australia…), we get a better and more detailed picture. Not quite perfect yet as we pick up other meanings of the word such as Mr. Bruges and Mr. Brugge, but in this case these are luckily very few (Gent would be more problematic as that word has many more meanings in English than Ghent). When using this search method, you get the following results:

Pages located in	Bruges	Brugge
USA	1,110,000 hits	1,180,000 hits
UK	266,000 hits	113,000 hits
Ireland	58,800 hits	13,600 hits
Australia	33,200 hits	28,600 hits
Total	1,468,000 hits	1,335,200 hits

These results vary from hour to hour and have to be taken with a grain of salt. In a rough sense, however, they seem to indicate that in Britain and Ireland, usage of the word “Brugge” is lagging quite a bit behind “Bruges”, while in the US, both words are used roughly equally. Based on this, I would stick with Bruges for now and revisit the question from time to time… As for Mumbai, the same method of measuring English usage shows it beating Bombay by a wide margin. LVan 02:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Downes51 wrote, "Even in Brussel which is technically in Flanders (in fact it's the capital but French speakers are probably more abundant) you will see no road signs in any other language than Flemish." This is very incorrect: Brussels used to be a Dutch-speaking place in Brabant at a time that 'Flanders' was not yet generalized for Dutch-speaking Belgium; and is not part of the current region Flanders either, it is a region on its own which is officially bilingual. Thus despite of its present near-90% majority of French-speaking inhabitants, every official road sign and official publication is in both French and Dutch. Indeed, the capital of Flanders (region and community) is outside the Flemish Region; though the Flemish Community comprises the matters for speakers of Dutch in the Brussels-Capital Region. Originally, Mechelen was the capital of the Flemish Region; like nearly half a millenium earlier for the capital of the Burgundian Netherlands, the capital was moved to Brussels: Flanders wished to express its holding on to the Flemish Community in Brussels. Brussels is also the capital of the French Community though not of Wallonia which has Namur as capital.

I'm rather pleasantly surprised at LVan's statistics for so far I almost never heard 'Brugge' from an English mouth. On the other hand, times change: my own home town in its most famous 16th century used to be known in England only as 'Mechlin'; when as such forgotten except by the most well-informed, early tourists in the 'Belle Époque' learnt about it as 'Malines', its French name. Nowadays, the latter has become obsolete and the city is again best known and now also usually spelled by its native name 'Mechelen' which speakers of English pronounce the way they say 'Mechlin'. It looks like such is going on for Bruges becoming Brugge though as LVan indicated, we should not lead but follow practice. The statistics however do indicate that the article introduction must mention e.g. Bruges by its French name, or at present also in English often called Brugge by its native Dutch language name which assumedly used to signify landing stage, is ... The remainder of the article content should for now continue to use 'Bruges' only. — SomeHuman 6 Dec2006 18:01-18:51 (UTC)

Well that just shows what I know then. They must just all be unofficial road signs I see when driving in the Brussel area. I checked some of them today... I wish somebody would take them down! More seriously, LVan put his finger on it when he said "Usage in Flanders is not relevant here since this is an English encyclopedia." What I have been on about, and maybe it's a foolish idee fixe on my part, is the absurd situation whereby English speakers use a French word to name a city where French is merely understood (I nearly said tolerated) rather than spoken. And there is a practical aspect too, namely that anybody driving in Belgium hoping to find a road-sign pointing to Bruges is not going to be able to find it. We've probably done this to death now, I don't expect to contribute further on this matter, which doubtless will be a relief to many. downes51

Bruges by its French name, or at present also in English often called Brugge by its native Dutch language name

This is nonsense. Bruges is the English names and has been since the late Middle Ages. What next, [[Antwerp[[ should be Antwerpen in English? Why not rename Rome to Roma, Milan to Milano or Florence to Firenze to avoid using French names for cities where French is not spoken. We are coming up with the silliest arguments here due to a Dutch/French issue some contributors have, that would not occurs in other articles outside of the Belgian linguistics realm. Since when are road signs in English in Belgium? Bruges is English, just like Flushing, Antwerp, Ghent, ... and has been for centuries. Do you think it really matters how much the English names are used in those cities? You're failing to recognize it as an proper English name and not just a French word imposed by whoever. --moyogo 23:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

In case you're wondering. Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales already used the name in English (spelled Brugges). I think 7 centuries of usage is enough for the name Bruges to be considered part of the English language and not just a French name. Please complain about French names when relevant, not when an English name looks like a French name and has for centuries (be it for historical reasons) simply because you feel it's a disrespect to the Dutch natives of the town. --moyogo 00:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Digging this is getting rather interesting, the spelling Brugges seems to have been used in Dutch at some point too, for example in Eugeen Edward Stroobant’s Myne eerste vlerken (1842). --moyogo 00:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm Flemish, I know we call it Brugge, but I also know well enough that normally every English speaking person calls it Bruges. Hence the names of travel guides like the Lonely Planet[2], Rough Guide[3], Eyewitness[4] or the New York Times / Frommers[5]. Travel guides will probably try to use the most common, best known name, not some obscure old French variation which their audience does not use... Fram 20:14, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting we use the archaic Brugges. I’m just saying Bruges might not be from French but from Dutch, with an evolution similar to the French name through centuries. --moyogo 14:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

In a perfect world each city 'd have the same name in all languages. It would make life very easy and it would be quite entertaining if we could hear the english and french desperately trying to pronounce "Brugge" (with its soft "g") the same way as we Flemings do (just kidding ;-)

Seriously, it is not a perfect world, and since "Bruges" is the name the English use for "Brugge", the name in the English wiki should be "Bruges", just like the Dutch page on London should be "Londen" and the page on Paris "Parijs".

I too am Flemish, and although I see the french imperialist nature from up close every day (meaning that by refusing or being incapable to learn/speak the language of the Flemish town they move to, they slowly turn it into a French speaking one), I don't think that the fact that Bruges is an originally French name matters here.

And oh, one more thing. I live just outside Brussels, and ALL the official road signs in Brussels are in fact bilingual by law. Exclusively Flemish road signs in Brussels would result in catastrophy because the french speaking population would be unable to read any of them *LOL* 81.88.110.49 14:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, I think flemishs have to stop they paranoia against french language... Also, modern Flanders make that people tought now that flemish has been an official language for 2000 years... Flemish Elites were always very attached to the french language... so why will you now erase this part of History?

There's nobody who wants to erase it. French for 'Brugge' is 'Bruges'... Wikifalcon 14:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Bruges is also the English usage and, as this is English Wiki ... Please read the argument above. Folks at 137 05:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

We're getting off topic here, but Flemish people really do no have anything against French languages. It's only a very minor part that does (they do make a lot of noise though!!). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.200.81.57 (talk) 22:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

It is interesting how cool and rational the discussion has stayed on this page. I was reading the talk pages on several Polish cities that where German before 1945, wich have similar discussions, it's a bit more heated than here....it's offtopic I know, but still! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Knijert (talk • contribs) 16:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I am English and have only ever heard of the place referred to as Bruges until I went on holiday there last week (absolutely loved it) and realised that the locals call it Brugge. Whilst I agree that Brugge is therefore the proper name of the place (just as England is properly England not Angleterre!) I don't agree that that is what everyone should call it. Over history and for whatever linguistic reasons the majority of English that have heard of the place seem to refer to it as Bruges. Therefore on the English internet where people are most likely to search by the most commonly used term it seems to make sense to call it Bruges, at least in the first instance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.174.222.110 (talk) 22:36, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

English language is a mish mash of mainly germanic and latin (and some older local) languages so its not really surprising the we confuse and contradict. Embrace the randomness I say! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.174.222.110 (talk) 22:52, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Bruges and Zeebrugge

I don't understand why the English use the Dutch name for "Zeebrugge" (French:Zeebruges) and the French name for "Bruges" (Dutch: Brugge). Zeebrugge means Brugge by the sea. Not very consistent!!! 81.245.241.238 18:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

You're right, I'll fix that. Consistence above all! Wikifalcon 21:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

This is not what I meant. For me it should be "Zeebrugge" and "Brugge" 81.245.241.238 00:02, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

That's a discussion that has been going on for long (see above). But the English name for Brugge is Bruges, which is also the French name. The German name is Brügge. Even the official site (www.brugge.be) says so. But you would 've been right if you said when it's Bruges, it should also be Zeebruges. Like Brügge and Zeebrügge (otherwise the German pronunciation wouldn't be correct). There's really no way Brugge would be Brugge in English. In Dutch we also say Parijs to Paris while the French say Londres to London (and we say Londen)... Wikifalcon 09:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. In England everybody says "Zeebrugge". And a flemish person changes it into Zeebruges. Unbelievable 81.245.241.238 18:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Change it back to Zeebrugge then? Then we lose our consistence... But there is no way of changing Bruges into Brugge. Bruges is the English name for Brugge, nothing we can do about that... Wikifalcon 18:58, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Of course you should change it back to "Zeebrugge". The name is Zeebrugge! 81.245.241.238 19:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah and the name is Brugge, but also Bruges. That means nothing. But I was already in doubt if this was the right solution, so you're right. Zeebrugge it will be, even if that's not consistent... I'll change it back. Still in French it remains Zeebruges and in Germand Zeebrügge, 'cause they say it like that. An exception for English. Wikifalcon 19:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Lets see it like this. The encyclopediae Britannica and Encarta use Brugge, Bruges is only a redirect to Brugge. Because of all sorts of (rightful) reasons, people hang on to the historical name they learned in school. If you see the Wikipedia as a good dictionary, then Bruges is the right word, if you see it like a encyclopedia, then as the other encyclopediae, Brugge is the right word (personal point of view). Anyhow, Bruges is fine if you are only confronted with Brugge through books and television. Because the world is getting smaller, a lot of people will discover and slowly learn that using the official name as used by the locals, offers less confusion and much more comfort. (Even for the Belgians, maintaining three names is quite a nightmare)

Because Zeebrugge did not have such a historical impact, the word Zeebruges is not ancred in the brains, so there is no problem adopting it. So one could state that we are halfway, still one or two generations to go ... We know that for adopting standards, English speaking people are not the fastests (E.g. Imperial versus metric system) --Foroa 21:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

The official website of Brugge/Bruges uses Brugge, Bruges, Bruges and Brügge. If we, Dutch-speakers, talk about our city in English, we automaticly say Bruges; the same for French (Bruges) and German (Brügge)... Otherwise we should also stop calling Parijs Parijs and call it Paris. And what to say about some Azian cities for example...?

About Zeebrugge: are you saying now we should use Zeebruges or keep on using Zeebrugge? Wikifalcon 21:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC) edit: there's even an article about the different names of cities in different languages: [6] Wikifalcon 22:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Though not consistent, I think Zeebrugge is quite well known and commonly used. The Port uses http://www.zeebruggeport.be/ anyway. Actually, if people would really like it in english, it should rather be somthing like Seabruges, but as this town has no real long historical background, it rather keeps its dutch known, also in other languages... --LimoWreck 21:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Also note how the official city site also uses a mixed version: [7] :

By ship: Hull (North England) - Zeebrugge. Zeebrugge is Bruges' port. The village is situated at 10 miles from the centre of Bruges. Daily services between Hull and Zeebrugge. Night crossing, approximately 14 hrs.. So as for Zeebrugge, i don't think their should be any discussion about the spelling. For Brugge/Bruges, both forms can be defended, both make sense somehow, so that's a rather endless discussion I think (a discussion where all parties will easily agree both forms makes sense somehow) ;-) --LimoWreck 21:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. I was way too quick with my changes. Also on the official site of the port and on the official site of Bruges they use Zeebrugge. Nowhere Zeebruges (in English) is used...

Pronunciation

It would be nice to have a native Belgian French and a native Belgian Flemmish speaker do pronuncation of the city name and upload an ogg. That would be nice. gren グレン 23:11, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

In Bruges Movie....

I did not find reference to this movie. I guess this is the movie that made this city widely known (I am not from Europe and I heard this name first time in the movie). Can somebody add proper references? Leotolstoy (talk) 15:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

The city's fame is not really reliant on the film. The film might be worth a mention as having had taken place there, but to say that it "made this city widely known" only reflects a particular POV situation. Whether there is ultimately a Dan Brown-effect is yet to be seen, but I really don't think the city can handle too many more tourists.--Stomme (talk) 15:53, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

~I'm pretty sure that the movie will increase the visits to Bruges, whether the capacity of the city can handle it or not. the locals will suffer :)--Infestor (talk) 01:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Red links

Why are the links to the Flag and the Coat of Arms red ? Galoubet (talk) 09:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The links point to Flag of Bruges and Coat of arms of Bruges, and there are no such articles yet. They appear as Flag and Coat of arms because the links are piped. -- Jeandré, 2008-10-09t14:37z

In Bruges

In Bruges is a 2008 film directed and written by Martin McDonagh. The film stars Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson as hitmen in hiding, with Ralph Fiennes as their gangster boss. The film takes place within the Belgian city of Bruges. In Bruges was the opening night film of the 2008 Sundance Film Festival. The film opened in limited release in the United States on 8 February 2008; premiered at the Dublin Film Festival on 15 February 2008; later went on full release in the Republic of Ireland on 7 March 2008; and opened 18 April 2008 in the United Kingdom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.243.189 (talk) 23:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Grote Markt -> Markt

The central square in Bruges is called "Markt", so I changed "Grote Markt" to "Markt" on Bruges, Grote Markt and I renamed Grote Markt (Bruges) to Markt (Bruges). I have done this a few times before and every time it went back to "Grote Markt" over time.

The point is this: the official name of that square is "Markt", on all maps you will find "Markt", all publications of the City of Bruges use the name "Markt" and the locals in the street call it "Markt". It is certainly true that similar squares in other cities are called "Grote Markt", but I do not see how that justifies calling the square in Bruges "Grote Markt". So I am certainly in favour of a redirect for Grote Markt (Bruges) and I also think that Markt (Bruges) should be listed in Grote Markt. Jushi (talk) 21:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

World War I

I read that Bruges was severely damaged during World War I. But there is no mention of it in the article. Can somebody add some about this time in the city? 4.240.117.22 (talk) 22:40, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Wasn't it a trading colony of the Genoese at one point

If so, it seems not exactly acknowledged in the article. JoshNarins (talk) 10:32, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Timeline of Bruges

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content! Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 14:24, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Collective term for people and/or things from Bruges?

I wonder what are the generally accepted collective terms - in various European languages - for people and/or things from Bruges? Ucypanp (talk) 12:43, 11 June 2021 (UTC)