Talk:Vanderbijlpark

South Africa Mid‑importance

	South Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Question

Why is this page called "Vanderbijlpark, Gauteng"? As far as I am aware there is no other Vanderbijlpark to distinguish it from and if there is this one is certainly the most important. This seems to be an example of the "Paris, France" syndrome. Booshank 22:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vanderbijlpark is the town, and Gauteng is the one of the provinces of this country, South Africa. Its like New York is a province and New Jersey is the town and all this is in the U.S.A

28/05/2007 21h42 jason

Yes, I know that, but why is it necessary to include the province in the title? Booshank 23:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Compare Johannesburg or even Pretoria for that matter - the "Gauteng" part of the identifier is unnecessary in this case as multiple cities with the name VDBP do not exist. Have a look at the naming convention. Niël 02:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since when is Vanderbijlpark a city? And a large one at that? Large town, sure, but a city? 19/06/2007 23:07 UTC -ArohemQ-

Article name change

I'm changing the name of this article to "Vanderbijlpark" to fit in with Wikipedia convention. If there are any objections, please discuss it here. Niël 01:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Population

Is it 200,000 or 80,000. There's a contradiction. 122.167.87.216 (talk) 07:19, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed disruptive content

I've just done a large reversion in the article to remove a load of rubbish. Unfortunately a few good edits also ended up in the trash. Please help to get the article back into proper shape. Roger (talk) 09:59, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]