Talk:Senne (river)

Name

More than half of his river's course is either through a monolingual French or a bilingual French and Dutch area. Therefore I think that using the French name Senne would be more appropriate. Ivo von Rosenqvist (talk) 10:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The problem with linguistic issues such as this is that they're very touchy subjects. I wrote covering of the Senne myself, to which covering of the Zenne redirects. In order to avoid controversy, I think it would be best if you were to get some sort of consensus myself. If you ask User:Hooiwind (who is a fair and representative Fleming), and he's ok with the page move and renaming, then it has my blessing. Otherwise, I think it's probably better if it stays where it is.

Also, please try to avoid deleting the WPBelgium banner when you comment on talk pages. -Oreo Priest 11:48, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I am a Fleming myself. And I don't think it is a good idea to let Flemings decide about those matters themselves. This is an English language matter. To give a similar example: If you let someone from Kosovo decide whether it should be Prishtinë or Priština, he will probably choose the Albanian form, even though the Serbian form is more usual in English. What you should do, is check other English language encyclopaedias. When most of them use Zenne, you should use that form. When they use Senne, you should use that one.

Besides, even if you let Belgians decide themselves about the matter, you should at least consult some Walloons as well. Ivo von Rosenqvist (talk) 18:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Basically there is no established term in English (if there were, this would be a no-brainer), so I would prefer the status quo unless otherwise convincing stuff is brought up. If you can, do so, and it will probably get moved. I don't really want to seem bossy here, but I also don't want this article to be subjected to edit and move wars. -Oreo Priest 20:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, when you look at other rivers in Europe which course through various language areas, the English language usually picks the name that is used in the language English speakers are most familiar with. In English they say Oder (and not Odra), Meuse (and not Maas), or Yser (and not IJzer). And since more English speakers are familiar with French than there are who are familiar with Dutch, I think it would make more sense to speak about Senne, Dendre and Dyle. But I don't want to make an edit war about this matter either. If you think Senne is better than Zenne, so be it. I just think it would be less "artificial" to use the French names. Ivo von Rosenqvist (talk) 21:45, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think more than half of the river flows through Wallonia or Brussels, I think it's the other way around if I look on the map. If in English no preference is found, I see no reason to move the article. Oder, Meuse and Yser have been used in English as if they were an English word, for Zenne, Dijle or Dender there is no English name. Dijle and Dender flow for the longest part through Flanders, so moving those would be nonsense. As for Zenne, however, I could live with it being moved, but only if a valid and relevant argument is brought up. I'm afraid that using the argument of the so-called familarity (which I think is not that common) opens up the possibility that every Belgium-related article is moved to French. --Hooiwind (talk) 22:25, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

It is of course a sensitive issue. A hundred years ago all Flemish place names were internationally known by their French equivalents. Back then, R.M. Rilke wrote poems in German about the Tour Saint-Nicolas in Furnes. Even in Holland the French names were often used. I once read an article from 1909 in the Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad, where they were talking about La Panne.

But since Flanders has become monolingual, most French names have disappeared. There are still some relicts, though. In English for instance they often speak about Bruges, Ypres and Louvain. And in Italian they speak about Bruges, Ypres and Gand.

This is not that uncommon in Europe. The Dutch language itself still speaks about Warschau and Krakau. But not anymore about Stettin or Breslau. I think this is similar in Flanders. Hence, I think there is no need to worry that all Belgian articles would be moved to French.

Anyway. I think it is normal to use the French versions of place names in Brussels and Wallonia. And the Dutch names in Flanders (except for those few relicts). So, I think it should be Mons, Flobecq, Schaerbeek, Sint-Truiden and Sint-Genesius-Rode.

For rivers I think we should use the French names as soon as a part of the river's course is through Wallonia or Brussels. So, I think it should be Dendre, Dyle and Senne, but Nete (and not Nèthe). Ivo von Rosenqvist (talk) 23:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the facts, but I think you make a very subjective jump to come to your conclusion. Basically it states that, as soon as the subject has anything to do with Wallonia or Brussels (still bilingual by the way), French prevails. If English has no preference for the given subject, we should not start to "invent" or "suggest" one. I think French already has more than its share here, let's leave some bits for Dutch —again, only when English has no preference. As for Senne I can understand a page move (since it is mostly used in a Brussels-related context), but for Dijle en Dender, which flow through mainly Flemish cities and will be heard of in that context (Aalst, Dendermonde, Leuven, Mechelen), a page move only causes confusion. I also think a system as in the article about Watermaal-Bosvoorde (title in language X, first line Y -X) restores the language neutrality at least a bit. So, if you really insist, you can move this article. --Hooiwind (talk) 10:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think I am subjective. This has to do with linguistic traditions from a time that there were fewer national languages in Europe. I agree that it is unfair that everything that has to do with Brussels should be in French, but this appears to be the reality. Even in German (!) the press speaks about Der Gipfel von Laeken (The Laeken Declaration). In some cases using Dutch would be very unpractical. You can't expect Italians to say Brussel, when they call Brussels sprouts cavolini di Bruxelles. Just like you can't expect Dutchmen or Flemings to say Beijing, when they speak about pekingeend.

But in order to prevent edit wars I won't change the name to Senne. I think however that we should change the name, as soon as Walloons start to complain about it. But apparently they don't care as much about these matters as we Flemish do. Ivo von Rosenqvist (talk) 14:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, they do: fr:Discussion_Utilisateur:Ben2#Controverse concernant Bruxelles sur le Wikipedia anglophone, some of them can't stand the fact that even names as Leopoldstad and Belgisch Congo are mentioned after or underneath their French equivalent, even while mentioning that the French name was used in English. That's not what I call néerlandiser des choses, especially because many of the cited edits are reverts and the French name has not been deleted anywhere or whatsoever. I think all edits by me, by other people, and even English people who are considered néerlandophone by the wikiwatcher, Froydego, were fair (or well-intended) and that every single one of us has proved to be open to discussion or edits of our own edits (like you corrected me on Louvain). And tout cela n'a rien à voir avec rappeler les discours de certains partis extrémistes flamands. But anyways, I think we can end this talk now. --Hooiwind (talk) 10:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Name change

Hello everyone,
I know the previous discussion is (very) old but I think the name change to Senne should be done. If only to homogenise it with the covering of the Senne article. Does anyone oppose this change? --Brookford (talk) 13:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Edit: Renaming done per Brussels naming conventions --Brookford (talk) 10:51, 22 May 2020 (UTC)