Talk:Molenbeek-Saint-Jean

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Names survey, result

Between 23 December 2006 and 28 January 2007 there has been a survey about which names the articles for the municipalities in the Brussels region should have. The municipalities in question have different names in French and Dutch, the two official languages of the region. A majority of contributors to the survey prefers using one single same over using both names in the title. This single name should follow English usage, which has been determined using domain specific Google searches.

The final result of the survey is that:

Details about the survey can be found at Talk:Brussels-Capital Region/NamingArchive3. Markussep 18:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Derivation

The word molen means mill in the singular (cf Old English mylen, French moulin). The plural in Dutch is molens. LynwoodF (talk) 17:52, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

regarding Paris attacks

The artical mentions Molenbeek as a breeding ground for terrorist. I believe this is unnecessary stigmatizing a whole lot of inhabitants. Molenbeek is now the center of a political "war" (sorry cannot find the correct english word) between old and new regime. The Paris terror attacks, and Molenbeek suspects, are now politically used. I would like Wikipedia to be more neutral. Please undo the edits.Sennaw (talk) 13:31, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe worth mentioning that this is a POV rather than an established fact. Even so Molenbeek is now widely viewed as one of the many places where radical Islam has built a bridgehead. Maybe it will be Sint-Joost next week! Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 20:18, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Population

The article mentions, in the section called "21st Century", that the population has grown by 25% since 2010. This is inaccurate. I think the person who wrote this misunderstood their source article, which in any case dates from 2011.

In fact Molenbeek has grown by under 10% since 2010, as you can see from the French-language entry. That entry has a table of populations of Molenbeek over time. Would it be worthwhile to recopy that table here? In any case I'm changing the inaccurate fact for now. 132.206.33.61 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:20, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"home to most of the migrants"

What does this line in the opening even mean? It doesn't reference anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.12.52.219 (talk) 11:05, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Marka

Marka is a singer. His real name is Serge Van Laeken and he was indeed born at Molenbeek. There is an article on French WP (link here) and I have put him on my list of possible future articles. LynwoodF (talk) 00:42, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is now an article on Marka and I have put a link on SJM. LynwoodF (talk) 13:22, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
He probebly is bron in Watermaal bosvoorde and grew -up in Molenbeek. Vdkdaan (talk) 22:01, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Whitewashing of the terrorism issue

I think we can all agree that terrorism is not the defining issue of Molenbeek. Sadly, however, for 15 years, many of the world's terrorist affairs have originated in Molenbeek. In fact, there are entire articles in places like Le Monde, Die Welt, The Guardian, Time, etc., dedicated to how much Molenbeek is a center of European terrorism. Now, this may not be palatable, but the headlines are " "Molenbeek, la plaque tournante belge du terrorisme islamise", i.e., Molenbeek is unfortunately described as "The Hub of Terrorism". In the headlines. Now, are we as an encyclopaedia to hide this?
I think this is worth mentioning because user DePiep entirely blanked out the section. Cheerio. XavierItzm (talk) 11:44, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia, not a political pamphlet. At least there should be some logic instead of causeless associations. -DePiep (talk) 15:16, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So when Le Monde publishes an article about "The Hub of Terrorism" (Molenbeek), this is a causeless association? XavierItzm (talk) 03:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's just social justice warriors not yet getting enough bombings in Europe to have their blinders blown off. Can't offend Religion of Peace(tm) and its adherents, vast majority(tm) of whom are peaceful people. 193.165.237.11 (talk) 21:14, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In an encyclopaedia, an article about a subject is expected to provide a comprehensive introduction to the subject in question. When the subject is in the news because of some newsworthy event important enough to deserve coverage, the article can mention that, and link to the article about the event for further coverage. When a subject acquires an unfavourable reputation for whatever reason, and this circumstance is important enough to deserve mention in an encyclopedia, it must be covered, but by stating and referencing facts, and within measure: the article is supposed to be comprehensive. This article could do a lot more to cover the basics (e.g. education, politics, demographics, economy, infrastructure, well-known buildings, events, organizations, and inhabitants) and it makes some sweeping claims that should be nuanced and backed up with references to hard data. Rp (talk) 08:50, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit dispute about Jihad and Molenbeek

I have been in a small edit war with IP 83.134.187.189 (also on Brussels and Belgium, but here at least the issue is very relevant).

The first two sources ([1][2] basically the same text reprinted in two places with a different title) and the fourth one[3] need to go because they are opinion pieces, not neutral journailistic articles. The other ones are relevant, but don't support his points in such black-and-white terms as he proposes:

This is his so far latest revert. Edit summary: "Nope, it's a Jadhi safe haven by a majority of the residents and I'll continue giving references till this is left alone.". Sources used by him include [4], "the Molenbeek residents receptive to calls to violence are a small minority".

[5] is an interesting article which certainly can be used, but again not to support the points the IP is trying to make. The Daily Express is just a trash newspaper. But even there nothing suggests that a majority of Molenebeek residents supports the terrorists, and says things like "Molenbeek’s residents - at first ashamed by the circumstances that put their neighbourhood on the map - have refused to be painted with the same brush, holding a demonstration in solidarity with Paris and in defiance of terrorism." The final article as well doesn't support the edits by the IP.

"The Islamic State of Molenbeek" is only found in one op-ed, not in neutral journalistic articles, and should thus not be added to this (or nay other) article per

Fram (talk) 12:29, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

@
Fram: I have been following your efforts to contain the activities of this anonymous editor, who appears to be obsessed with his/her particular view of this matter. If he/she ever reads this, I should like to make it clear to him/her that this is an encyclopedia and articles should not be swamped with biased material about one aspect of the article's subject. The material is out of place on Brussels and Belgium
, and also in the lead section of this article. There is a subsection on terrorism, which already makes it clear that Molenbeek has associations with terrorist activity.
As a separate matter, I think this person should stop hiding behind the anonymity of an IP address and either log in, if they are a registered editor, or register and tell us something about themselves on their user page. LynwoodF (talk) 13:42, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on

Sint-Jans-Molenbeek. 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.

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:27, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 5 March 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

evidence is needed for that assertion. Since the consensus seen is a bit rough, there is no prejudice if editors want to begin a fresh RM discussion and garner consensus for the shortened form of the name, as suggested below. Kudos to editors for your input, and Happy Publishing! (nac by page mover) Paine Ellsworth, ed.  put'r there  22:57, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply
]

talk) 04:08, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply
]

I looked to see how articles on other BCR municipalities are named and found that, where the French and Dutch names differ and there is no specific English name, the French name is generally used. The only other exception is
Berchem-Sainte-Agathe/Sint-Agatha-Berchem and, if we change Molenbeek, I think we ought to change Berchem as well. LynwoodF (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
I see that there was an extensive discussion about this whole matter a decade ago. See Talk:Brussels-Capital Region/NamingArchive3. Personally, I dissent from the conclusions reached at that time and I remain of the opinion expressed above. Has anyone else any thoughts about this? LynwoodF (talk) 17:49, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's quite a discussion you linked to with a lot of (sound?) statistical analysis behind it. It seemed that the name for this article was regarded as undecided, with several suggesting that the name be just "Molebeek". The argument for the Dutch version seemed to rest largely on its resemblance to English word order and pronunciation. Since there was considerable discussion in 2007, certainly more than we're having now, that led to the current name being kept, I say it should stand, unless more than just one person want to argue for a change. Dhtwiki (talk) 22:01, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, obviously, we cannot change the name because of just one opinion. It is a pity that the person who caused this discussion to start has not come back. I will continue to say Molenbeek, just as I say Saint-Josse, but nobody should have any trouble finding the article, as there is a perfectly good redirect. LynwoodF (talk) 09:27, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I thought of pinging the signed-in account, but I don't want to encourage someone who has too little interest to have this on their watchlist. Another point in favor of the French name is that the official website link is merely www.molenbeek.be (given at Wikidata) but leads to the French-language version. The similarity of the Dutch to English is doubtful as the spelling is still foreign and leaves me confused as to the way it should be pronounced; and, as you said, the French pronunciation might actually be more familiar to English readers, as that language is taught more. Still, I'm agnostic about changing the name. I have this article on my watch list because I linked from it to an obscure Dutch painter, so I don't mind letting the Dutch version stand. Dhtwiki (talk) 19:37, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with a lot of what was said in the discussion a decade ago and, in particular, the point about Dutch being more like English is irrelevant. The word-order argument is spurious. In England we have place names which start with a saint's name, but the more usual pattern is to place one after the name of a town or village, e.g. Chalfont St Peter. My thinking is more in line with this opinion. That said, there does not seems to be much interest in this discussion and I should be reasonably happy to leave things as they are, given that there are adequate redirects for both Molenbeek and Berchem. LynwoodF (talk) 00:07, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: In my opinion, it seems perfectly reasonable to favour the most common local name where there is no obvious English usage (ie. Antwerp). Here that is clearly French, thus Molenbeek-Saint-Jean. Attempts to find an English-sounding term have led to decisions which, in my opinion, are non-nonsensical to anyone familiar with the subject in person (Sonian Forest, anyone?).—Brigade Piron (talk) 10:06, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree wholeheartedly with you. Like you, I have connections with Belgium and the Brussels region in particular, but I had never come across the expression Sonian Forest. Do you also agree with me about Berchem-Sainte-Agathe? LynwoodF (talk) 10:32, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In principle, yes. But I do not know Berchem very well and haven't been able to find any data on its language breakdown, in light of its proximity to the language boundary, though my search has only been pretty cursory. Assuming it is majority francophone, I'd certainly support the move. —Brigade Piron (talk) 14:38, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This little map suggests that Berchem has one of the higher percentages of Dutch speakers, although the figure is still pretty low. Berchem is the westernmost of the brown communes, just to the north of Molenbeek, which is yellow. Sadly, there do not seem to be very many of us who are interested in this discussion. At least, you have doubled the "support" vote! LynwoodF (talk) 19:40, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The description for that map says it gives the percentage of voters who have listed their home address in the Dutch form, which is not necessarily equal to the percentage of voters who prefer to speak Dutch, and it doesn't take non-voters into account. It leaves very little doubt that nearly all inhabitants of every commune prefer to write French over Dutch, although there might still be a sizeable number who speak Dutch dialect and write in French. English language publications apparently use the French names more often. So in all, the French names are definitely more common, and I think it's entirely reasonable to use them for all of these communes. Meanwhile, in this case, it would also be reasonable to use Molenbeek, which is its usual name, as you can see on its own website - it is the only well-known town of that name, and other objects called Molenbeek are far less important. Rp (talk) 22:28, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the map gives only a proxy indication of the number of Dutch speakers, for which reason I used the word "suggests", but I think it illustrates that Berchem is more or less in line with the other communes. It is refreshing to find that you, a native Dutch speaker, take the same pragmatic view as I do. The whole of Brussels feels to me like a predominantly French-speaking area, and so it seems natural to me to use the French versions of place names when speaking English, if there is no specific English version of a name. LynwoodF (talk) 23:27, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On that basis, I would support a move for Berchem-Sainte-Agathe. Personally I don't agree with cutting down the name to just "Molenbeek" in the interests of precision.—Brigade Piron (talk) 08:10, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, move it to Molenbeek instead per
    Fram (talk) 08:54, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Why not let's just decide on the proposed move first, and then have a separate discussion about whether to use the shortened title? Given the low number of contributors, it's not likely there will be any consensus on anything at this rate. —Brigade Piron (talk) 22:00, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
talk page or in a move review
. No further edits should be made to this section.


Back to Brussels naming convention

Molenbeek-Saint-Jean → Sint-Jans-Molenbeek – This article title has changed without consensus. There is a long established Brussels naming convention where is agreed that the name of this article should be Sint-Jans-Molenbeek. Brussels is not a French-speaking city but bilingual. --Wester (talk) 23:57, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There was an RfC, just above, where there were two "supports", one "agnostic" (me), and one "let's just call it Molenbeek" or words to that effect. It was closed, plausibly, as consensus for the move. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:13, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think we reached consensus that past discussions have concluded that the French name should be used, being the name most frequently used in English. Rp (talk) 08:25, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It might be true that the Brussels naming conventions should be re-discussed. What was true in 2007 is not necessarily so now. I seriously question whether the average user would genuinely prefer an ugly and genuinely unhelpful term like "Sonian Forest" purely in the interests of linguistic balance. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:54, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 May 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Per above, French names are usually used for Brussels places unless it has an obvious English common name. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 06:30, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Molenbeek-Saint-Jean → Sint-Jans-Molenbeek – This was moved with a small discussion between a very few people rather than a big one, going against Wikipedia:WikiProject_Belgium/Brussels_naming_conventions where discussion should have taking place or linked at from and also missing a broader call for discussion DagneyGirl (talk) 08:02, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No such user (talk) 08:18, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Oppose: This is what I wrote in 2019 and I am still of the same opinion:
I looked to see how articles on other BCR municipalities are named and found that, where the French and Dutch names differ and there is no specific English name, the French name is generally used. The only other exception is
Berchem-Sainte-Agathe/Sint-Agatha-Berchem and, if we change Molenbeek, I think we ought to change Berchem as well. LynwoodF (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
I see that there was an extensive discussion about this whole matter a decade ago. See Talk:Brussels-Capital Region/NamingArchive3. Personally, I dissent from the conclusions reached at that time and I remain of the opinion expressed above. Has anyone else any thoughts about this? LynwoodF (talk) 17:49, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
LynwoodF (talk) 14:50, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts: stop wasting your time on the naming, spend your efforts on improving the contents. There really is a lot to improve. Rp (talk) 20:47, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: We had this discussion a little over two years ago, and it's still on this page. The Brussels naming convention page says that—in lieu of an English, or easily Anglicized, name—"Use the French name in the title", and that is what we have now. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:54, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Naming convention states clearly the Dutch name there, so renaming it without a broader discussion should not have been okayed in the first place. Also sidelining a guide line without any real backing other than just an opinion of two/three people should not have been done. Then it would be very easy to to override the consensus achieved, just wait a few years and with small numbers of proponents change it. That is the reason why I requested to restore it according to the guide lines. I do not have a preference myself, just following a consensus that was already reached. And maybe the suggestion of using Molenbeek can take the sting out of a language-battle that the guides lines is trying to avoid. DagneyGirl (talk) 09:55, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was citing the guideline that you pointed to in your original post. What language in that, or any other, guideline suggests that the Dutch version of the city name should be used? Dhtwiki (talk) 22:43, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The guidline says: "for the following municipalities no significant preference in the English language has been found. After discussion, the Dutch names have been chosen: for the following municipalities no significant preference in the English language has been found. After discussion, the Dutch names have been chosen:
  • Sint-Jans-Molenbeek
  • Sint-Agatha-Berchem"
So it states very clear to use the Dutch is case of of those two municipalities of the capital region. DagneyGirl (talk) 03:57, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I see that now. Thank you. However, the underlying 2007 decision-making process doesn't say much about why the Dutch version was decided upon, just that it was. If I had to draw a conclusion from the exhaustive discussion, it would be that just "Molenbeek" is the more usual reference, and that the French version got more Google hits (a huge amount of time is spent analyzing those hits) than the Dutch. Dhtwiki (talk) 05:20, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. :)
I Think ""Molenbeek" would be the more neutral option, even back then. But the consensus was apparently was to go for the Dutch one. It's okay to discus of changing it to another name, not so okay just the undermine a guideline. Since it's now a bit of stalemate a new discussion might be in order, if the page should be moved back before the discussion of what name to be used is also real option. If one wants to give the guideline still as a good rule of thumb for users. DagneyGirl (talk) 05:58, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would happily support a proposal to change the name to "Molenbeek". I would also happily contribute to a proposal to modify the guideline, but I am now too old and tired to take the lead. This would perhaps deal with the similar anomaly of Berchem. LynwoodF (talk) 08:15, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we have to obey a guideline whose rationale is as unclear, at least to me, as this one is. You could start a discussion at the project page so that we could have a clearer understanding of how they arrived at their decision. Otherwise, we have a recent, if not particularly well attended, RfC where the French name was almost unanimously decided on (the one "oppose" favored "Molenbeek" by itself), and should let the present name stand. Dhtwiki (talk) 05:34, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Migrant communities in Molenbeek with over 1,000 people as of 1 January 2020:

I can't find the figures in this section in the referenced document, but it contains figures that contradict them: on tab 1.3.9, it says 3,343 inhabitants in Molenbeek are from North Africa, which is inconsistent with 5,960 being from Morocco.

Let's point out the exact source for the present figures, or replace them. Rp (talk) 14:43, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Molenbeek-Saint-Jean&oldid=1204044917"