Talk:Wezembeek-Oppem

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Belgium

	Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium 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.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

[Untitled]

The words "radicals" and "coexist" should be changed in ordre tot maintain the neutrality in this article about such a delicat subject.

Why do you feel these words are not neutral ? How should they be changed ? --FvdP 17:36, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

paragraph on linguistic facilities "situation"

The following paragraph isn't very clear:

Many Flemings regard these measures as only transitory for the time needed for French-speaking locals to "integrate themselves in Flanders", that is to convert to using Dutch. Many French-speaking people however see these facilities as a permanent right, that compensates for the irreversible attribution of the commune to Flanders. This situation is made more difficult by this commune's satellite status to the Brussels-Capital Region, in which both French and Dutch are official languages.

How is the situation made difficult? What is difficult in the situation? Is this specific to Wezembeek-Oppem or should this be moved to Municipalities with language facilities? -moyogo (talk) 19:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph is politically biassed.

Wezembeek-Oppem has language facilities because at a certain time, a significant proportion of the population spoke an official language other than the language of the region. See:Municipalities with language facilities

The paragraphs on what the "flemish perspective" is and what "Many French-speaking people ... see" are opinion and not fact, and are not supported.

Jezthomas (talk) 13:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jez, I agree with you. I think your edit is a good step, removing what appears to be WP:OR and providing a link to a separate article in which the language issues can be better discussed. Thanks -- Timberframe (talk) 14:49, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphanage during World War II

This topic is in need of attention from an expert on the subject.

The section or sections that need attention may be noted in a message below.

I have re-written what seemed to be a somewhat misunderstood or biased version. I found some sources hinting at the current version, but it should be looked over by an expert on Belgium during World War II. --Sasper (talk) 04:02, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Wezembeek-Oppem. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090310003827/http://www.carrefour.be/histoire.htm to http://www.carrefour.be/histoire.htm

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) 11:27, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]