Talk:Lindenhof hill

Merger as of September 2013

contra merging proprosed by User:Dbachmann as of September 16, 2013 (didn't we have that before...)

as Lindenhof is a 'quarter/district' and Lindenhof hill as mentioned a topographic locality
Lindenhof hill is the propably most important aerchological site in the city of Zürich,
as well a 'Monument of national importance', as popurly known;
referecences are given and described in the article;
see also de:Lindenhof (Zürich)

Roland 18:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Moving Page

I want to move this page to Lindenhof Hill instead of Lindenhof hill. Capitalizing the entire name of a proper noun is consistent with both Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters and the capitalization of other hills on Wikipedia.Strawberryfields77 (talk) 21:35, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~Support Merge I strongly ~~oppose, but I~~ instead propose to remove the ~~hill~~ part, to ~~move~~merge it to Lindenhof only, since its original name is not Lindenhofhügel, but Lindenhof only. Besides: Paradoxically, Lindenhof means nothing else than the Courtyard of the Lime! -- ZH8000 (talk) 22:11, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there is no reason to keep two seperate articles about Lindenhof and Lindenhof hill, since a) both articles decribe the same geographical object, and b) both, the hill, as well as the square are locally known with the same name, namely Lindenhof. This is undisputably also indicated by the fact that both en:WP-articles are related with the very same de:WP-article. Finally, this merge would dismiss the "problem" of the renaming! -- ZH8000 (talk) 22:35, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know German, but based on what you have said here, merging w/ Lindenhof makes more sense than changing capitalization.Strawberryfields77 (talk) 22:57, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Strawberryfields77, no problem to rename, don't hesitate :-) But, in short, strongly oppose merge, since argued more than three years ago at Talk:Lindenhof hill#Merger as of September 2013, i.e. at the first section of this talk to avoid wasting our common time and resources:

There are different localities named Lindenhof: The hill of the same name, see section geography and >hill at city government<, and the district, in German Quartier of Altstadt >district at city government< at the historical core of the city of Zürich.

Hence, the wiki related to the district may be expanded. This commenting as main author of Lindenhof hill, and having local and German knowledge, happy editing, Roland zh (talk) 18:47, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Lindenhof is a homonym, of course, like so many geographical names! And first of all, it refers to the place on top of the hill. Hof (aka backyard/park or "place surounded by buildings (in the backyard)") even pronounces it in its name. So there are four different meanings, at least: The place, the hill, the district and the quarter. The last three are all derived from the place's name of course. But ~~Lindenhof hill~~ is simply an awkward and wrong translation, since never used in German. -- 15:53, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Besides, it should be moved/merged into Lindenhof, Zürich, since there are literally numerous Lindenhofs in German-speaking world. -- ZH8000 (talk) 16:19, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In general, from my side linking to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and pointing to geographical, political and historical, hence actually summarizing the encyclopedic facts:

Popularly the top of the hill, being the Lindenhof hill's plateau since the 13th-century as described at Lindenhof hill, is used as plaza/courtyard/park.

But encyclopedic: topographically, as also pointed to at the September 2013 section of this talk, and particularly at the Lindenhof hill wiki, it's a moraine hill, and btw the highest elevation within (not besides) the upper Limmattal (Limmat valley).

The hill's northern lower section keeps the original name Sihlbühl (see wiki), meaning the hill (Bühl) which was/is located within the former river deltas of Sihl (by about the 11th-century), and Limmat.

Related to the Lindenhof district (btw not a quarter and a district), about in the 1890 it was named after the Lindenhof hill when the historical town, surrounded by the demolished town wall, was named as the district of Altstadt. Latter is consisting of three sections (Quartier) named Rathaus, Lindenhof and City. And, facts again, Lindenhof quarter is also geographically not the same area as the hill which gave the name, and it's still a political division of the Altstadt district.

As per de:Lindenhof disambiguation, Lindenhof it's the name of various locations in German-language Switzerland and Europe, particularly Austria and Germany, ranging from buildings, places (villages/towns), various districts of cities allover Europe.

The name Lindenhof imho more appropriate had to translated as as Lime tree plaza (it's used as plaza/park).

Summarized, definitely no merger required, maybe renaming to Lindenhof Hill (Zürich), but to enhance Lindenhof as political division, eventually by renaming to Lindenhof (Quarter Zürich), as per Rathaus (Zürich) district, which unfortunately seems due to missing resources still just redirecting to Altstadt (Zürich), Roland zh (talk) 19:28, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Roland, I am sorry, but you are totally mistaken, or on a wrong path.

First of all, the hill is not named as such. There is no source for "Lindenhofhügel"! Nobody says so, correctly (quite vice versa for example to the Lake of Zurich, which is actually called a lake, even in German: Zürichsee). This hill in Zürich is just simply called Lindenhof. Period. Nothing else. – But I said so already above. We do not have to waste time by discussing a non-issue here.

Further, you make claims you do not source! This is not a question of NPOV, not at all, but of WP:VER.

Thirdly, you are fully lacking to understand what a homonym is, otherwise you would not argue the way you do. You misinterpret it totally. A homonym is a word, here a name, that refers to different things, in our case different geographicals objects, but with the same name. In other words: A Hof is not a hill (de: Hügel) is not a quarter is not a historical site ..., but, in our case, all these different things are named nothing else than–you guess it!–Lindenhof. ;-) Obviously, the quarter and the hill and the the Hof do not have to be the same, or even cover the same area, they just have the same name, namely ... Lindenhof; though geographically they do overlap to some extent, eventually not coincidentally. And that's the reason why they are called the same. ;-))

That's the way language works for centuries/millenias, and not only in German. – Please teach yourself correctly before claiming wrong or irrelevant statements. It is not the first time you fail to understand abstract concepts.

AND, we do not speak about old names, though how interesting and enlightening they might be (and it can be part of a mytological paragraph, of course), but in this context we discuss the article's name only, and this means the current wording. And that is ... yeah, Lindenhof.

Whether you translate Hof to place, or backyard, or plaza or whatever, is again not the issue here, NEITHER. I just mentioned it in order to make it understandable to non-German readers that, in first place, Lindenhof refers to a place/plaza/backyard/... the one on top of the hill. And therefore, historically totally reasonable, the hill has been (and still is!) called (named!) excately the same way. – And hey, what do we call such phenomenon? ... A homonym, you are so damn right!

So long and many words later: That's the reason to merge it as long as we do not pronounce the differences too much. It is just, well let's say it that way, more economical.

Your own misunderstanding started at the moment when you told yourself that the hill Lindenhof has to be named what it is, namely a hill. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT IT IS CALLED. The hill is just called LINDENHOF!!!

And AGAIN, as I already mentioned above already, this article as well as the [[Lindenhof]] are refering to the very same article in de:Lindenhof (Zürcher Hügelzug) (lit.: "Lindenhof (hill range of Zurich"). Why? Because they are called the same and there is no reason to make two different articles while describing two so closely related geographical objects!!! But the quarter Lindenhof has its own article in German WP, namely: de:Lindenhof (Stadt Zürich).

==>So, for the third time: Merge the articles "Lindenhof" (the place) and "Lindenhof hill" (the erronously named hill) and move it to "Lindenhof, Zürich".

Wow, what a waste of time! -- ZH8000 (talk) 23:42, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Lindenhof hill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:07, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lindenhof hill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:12, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]