Content deleted Content added
still favor Braunschweig - more examples |
Turtlecrown (talk | contribs) remove unref flag |
||
| (172 intermediate revisions by 94 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Hanseatic League |importance=Top }}
{{WikiProject Germany |importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Cities }}
}}
== Beer ==
As an inhabitant of Braunschweig for the last 28 years (I left the city in 2008) I must make some notes:
#Braunschweig does not have many breweries, but just 2: "Hofbrauhaus Wolters" (http://www.hofbrauhaus-wolters.de/) and "Feldschlösschen" (http://www.feldschloesschen.de/)
#The famous "Mumme" is ''not'' a beer, but a kind of malt sirup which *can* be mixed with beer (although the taste is quite questionable, but that's just my personal opinion). Also, it does not contain alcohol.
#The most famous beer from Braunschweig is definitely the "Wolters" pilsener which is characterized by it's nordish bitter taste. Feldschlösschen also makes a pilsener but that one it widely acknowledged as tasting quite bad. Also, Feldschlösschen makes a red beer called "Duckstein" but that one is not produced in Braunschweig. In addition to that, Feldschlösschen has its origin in Dresden and therefore would rather count as a Dresden beer than a Braunschweig beer.
#The Wolters brewery had great financial problems two years ago and was about to be closed, but Braunschweig's citizens formed a kind of "Keep Wolters alive" movement and donated a good amount of money, so the brewery is still alive.
#There are in fact more breweries, but those are just small family businesses, combined with taprooms. Their beer is not sold in any shops.
--[[Special:Contributions/78.177.157.4|78.177.157.4]] ([[User talk:78.177.157.4|talk]]) 12:45, 18 May 2009 (UTC) (my name is Frank Willeke)
:this is also the reason i got to the discussion page here. many != 2. i know of only one of the "breweries" frank mentions in the last paragraph of his comment. -- .~. [[Special:Contributions/84.133.124.111|84.133.124.111]] ([[User talk:84.133.124.111|talk]]) 22:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
== Great work! ==
Thanks at all there worked here for this Article.
This Article is not already ready, i hope.
when the Article is ready, I think the Design from the english
Article is better than the german ;) Greetings, --[[User:84.133.96.80|84.133.96.80]] 20:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
62.158.3.142 wrote: "Brunswick was founded by Bruno II (died before 1017 AD), a saxonian count." I didn't know, what to do with this sentence, but it seems to be wrong. The Brunswick website says, that the origins of the town are unknown, and that it may be founded by traders. So do other websites. No word about a Bruno. Instead of deleting the sentence I turned it to the version: "Legend says, that..." But actually I don't know about such a legend. Does anyone else know more? - [[User:Cordyph|Cordyph]] 15:56 Nov 6, 2002 (UTC)
:I am bothered by this paragraph as well. The Bruno/wik info would explain the etymology behind the English name Brunswick, but I have always been under the impression that Brunswick was just an anglicization of the German Braunschweig. [[User:Olessi|Olessi]] 2 July 2005 16:48 (UTC)
::I believe the english name is the mediaeval name of Braunschweig. Brunswiek, if I remember correctly. I learned that in school, so I have no references. And I also learned about the legend that this Bruno founded a Wiek (whatever that is) from which Braunschweig derived [[User:134.76.10.66|134.76.10.66]] 13:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::The founding by Bruno is a legend. But the ruler of the area in the time of the founding were the [[Brunonen]].--[[User:Dark Scipio|Dark Scipio]] ([[User talk:Dark Scipio|talk]]) 18:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
==Article name==
Why is this article not simply at [[Brunswick]]? The other places listed there don't seem to be important enough not to have that page at [[Brunswick (disambiguation)]]. - [[User:Sandman|Sandman]] 09:36, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Line 28 ⟶ 60:
**I agree. Wikipedia policy is not to have the english version of a name but the most common version used ''in'' english. That clearly is Brunswick, not [[Braunschweig]], so Brunswick is where the page belongs on the english wikipedia. German wikipedia, would needless to say be different. Sorry. [[User:Jtdirl|FearÉIREANN]] 03:33, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)
***In addition, remember even if [[Braunschweig]] is used increasingly in [[American english]], that does not mean the same phenomenon is happening in other forms of english. AE has tended to adopt nativised forms of names, eg, Turino, Milano, Roma, but that simply is not happening in British English, Hiberno-English or Indian English and I wonder if it is happening in Canadian English or Australian english. This is ''english'' wikipedia, not ''American English'' wikipedia and we must use forms of names that are internationally recognised. Google searches throw up largely American websites as most websites are American. That is no evidence that ''worldwide'' [[Braunschweig]] is either used or even recognised by people. The only people I have heard ever use that name are (i) Germans, naturally, and (ii) ''some'' users of American English on the web (never even in person). I have never heard it used by anyone else. We would want pretty clear evidence of its universal usage before opting for it. [[User:Jtdirl|FearÉIREANN]]
** I respect the theory but I'm not sure I agree that this is an American English only trend. For example, the Wikipedia article on the capital of China is at [[Beijing]] - Peking is a redirect. In the case of [[Brunswick]], I'd like to see some evidence that the anglicized version is still in wide use. The objective evidence the other way is starting to appear pretty compelling (see below). The only countervailing evidence presented so far is the personal experience of Wikipedians. I don't want to discount personal experience but, based on the reports above, it appears about evenly split so ... well, I guess I do discount it in this case. :-)
*** Well-filtered google searches find Braunschweig over Brunswick at > 50 to 1.
*** BBC.com (which I have to assume is written using British English) had 4 hits for Braunschweig and only one hit for Brunswick that refers to the city in Germany (and that one is in context of WW2).
Line 35 ⟶ 67:
*** Factiva all dates/all sources finds 1423 articles with "Braunschweig Germany" and 195 with "Brunswick Germany".
*** Two atlases checked so far use Braunschweig as the primary name (though they both list Brunswick as an alternate usage).
*** The city's official website has an English translation page that uses "Brunswick".
**** Personally, I discount this as the opinion of one webmaster with unknown English experience and possibly dated information. (I know I wouldn't trust Cleveland's official website to tell you anything useful about ''my'' hometown.)
Hold on, Wik. There is ''not'' the necessary percentage of people advocating the renaming of the page to justify a move of the page from its current ___location. Please follow the rules. [[User:Jtdirl|FearÉIREANN]] 21:32, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)
:What is the necessary percentage? It seemed to me that after Rossami's summary no one was really arguing for Brunswick any more. If you want to do so, how do you explain away the 50-to-1 Google ratio? --[[User:Wik|Wik]] 21:38, Dec 4, 2003 (UTC)
65% is now seen as representing something of a consensus for making a major change, such as a dramatic renaming or a deletion.
* ''Brunswick''/''Brunswick, Germany''/''Brunswick (disambigulation)'': -
** [[User:Jtdirl|FearÉIREANN]] [[User:Sandman|Sandman]] [[User:Angela|Angela]] [[User:Delirium|Delirium]] [[User:Wiwaxia|Wiwaxia]] [[User:Kingturtle|Kingturtle]] [[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]
**Total = 7.
**'''58% approx, 66% if including Orthogonal.'''
::I don't see all those opposing Braunschweig. Andy Mabbett, Wiwaxia, and Kingturtle have only commented on the disambiguation page. Delirium has not further responded after I told him how his search method was flawed. Sandman's argument seems to have been based on the same mistake. --[[User:Wik|Wik]] 23:58, Dec 4, 2003 (UTC)
* ''Braunschweig''
** [[User:Wik|Wik]] [[User:Robert Merkel|Robert Merkel]] [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] [[User:Morven|Morven]]
** Total = 4
**'''33% approx'''
* unclear, but tone suggests not a ''Braunschweig'' supporter: -
** [[User:Orthogonal|orthogonal]]
** Total = 1
As to google, google also says that the Prince of Wales's surname is ''Windsor'' (wrong), ''proves'' completely inaccurate facts about W.E. Gladstone are correct, confirms elementary factual errors about Ireland are ''true'', and contains many other such howlers. It is a thoroughly unreliable standard against which to measure facts, as I found when double checking information on it time and time again. [[User:Jtdirl|FearÉIREANN]] 22:08, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)
:Yes, but still it is the default unless you have a better authority to base your claim on.
::It should ''never'' be the default. If it was wikipedia's default, wikipedia would be a laughing stock. It is at best a secondary source notorious for its unreliability. [[User:Jtdirl|FearÉIREANN]] 15:47, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
: Google may not be a reliable source for many kinds of factual information, but as a polling device to provide evidence of general usage of language or the degree of importance or interest in a topic, I believe it to be quite credible. Granted, there is risk of a systemic sampling bias because the internet population is still skewed toward educated and affluent participants compared to the general population, but that is only a '''risk''' of sampling bias, not evidence that a biased result occurred. Wikipedia uses google searches as evidence all the time. As a single example, look at how often google is mentioned in support or rebuttal of an entry on the [[Wikipedia:Votes for deletion]] page. The internet may not be perfect but it's better than relying solely on personal opinion. [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] 21:56, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
And I don't think AE/BE is an issue here. Where do you get the idea Americans say Roma? "Rome Italy" - 2,060,000. "Roma Italy" - 207,000. So that's 10-1 for the English name. With Braunschweig it's 50-1 for the German. So the frequency of using the local form is 500 times higher for Braunschweig than for Rome. --[[User:Wik|Wik]] 23:58, Dec 4, 2003 (UTC)
I didn't say Americans use ''Roma''. I said that there is increased usage of native language names of European cities in the US. Such a phenomenon simply does not exist in the rest of the English speaking world. So whereas some academic and broadcasting organisations in the US opt for ''Milano'', in the rest of the english speaking world exclusively uses ''Milan''.
By the way the earlier mention of Beijing/Peking by Rossami is irrelevant. It is nothing to do with english vs native language names, but to do with different linguistic methods of creating an english name. Everyone uses Beijing and have done for decades. It has no relevance to this debate. [[User:Jtdirl|FearÉIREANN]] 15:47, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
: I respectfully disagree. Beijing/Peking is not merely a choice of written transcription. It is also an example of the difficulty of phenome matching - some sounds have no easy parallel in the target language. Before long-distance travel became cheap and easy, the experience of most english-speakers with german phenomes was quite limited. Brunswick was a reasonable transliteration of word by a non-german speaker. We now have greater exposure to more phenomes. If you heard someone say Braunschweig today, I dare say you would write down something other than Brunswick. As for "everyone [using] Beijing... for decades", I can personally vouch for the use of Braunschweig by Americans for over a decade. Braunschweig/Brunswick is merely an older example that has gone uncorrected longer, not fundamentally a different problem from Beijing/Peking. [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] 21:56, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
-----
Lexis-Nexis suggests Braunschweig is more in use: A search for "Braunschweig" and "Germany" on European news sources for the past six months gets 25 hits, most appear relevant, whilst "Brunswick" and "Germany" gets 10 hits, most irrelevant. --[[User:Robert Merkel|Robert Merkel]] 05:46, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
European news sources aim their content at multilingual audiences and so make considerable usage of native language names. That is irrelevant here as this wikipedia is exclusively an english language encyclopædic source aimed at english language speakers and has to use a form recognisable in english. ''Braunschweig'' would mean absolutely nothing to millions of english language speakers except those belonging to special subcategories; people of German descent, people with direct cultural and business links to the city, people with regular access to, and fluency in, non-english language sources, etc. Wikipedia policy is to use the most common accurate name. For the generality of readers worldwide that is ''Brunswick''. ''Braunschweig'' 's usage is not recognised by the generality of readers but those attached to subgroups who have specific reason why ''they'' would use or hear the german language name, not the english deriviative. (By the way, BBC news carried a story some days ago which started "A trial in the German city of Brunswick . . . ") [[User:Jtdirl|FearÉIREANN]] 15:47, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
: So we should put ourselves out of step with European '''and''' US news sources? Who is left that we will be in-step with? We agree on the policy - most common english usage. We obviously still disagree on the conclusion. I've presented my facts. I believe they overwhelmingly support ''Braunschweig'' as the more common usage. I disagree strongly with your statement that ''Braunschweig'' is limited to special subcategories. So prove me wrong. What facts or measurable behaviors support your belief that ''Brunswick'' is still the more common usage? [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] 21:56, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
::(And yes, BBC is inconsistent in their usage. With your one new data point, BBC is now at 4 ''Braunschweig''s to 2 ''Brunswick''s.) [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] 21:56, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
-----
Just to put my own two cents in (of course, just because it's me, Jtdirl will probably oppose it) I would favor "Brunswick" being a disambiguation page and "Braunschweig" being the listing for the German city. But there clearly is an AE/BE problem; I rarely hear Americans use "Brunswick" for the German city, but in part that may be because I live in Maryland and "Brunswick" means "Brunswick, Md." when used alone. Brits tend to anglicize (they would say, of course, "anglicise") more than Americans; Americans tend to use native names more, but the real statistic varies from place to place. Nobody even America calls the Italian capital "Roma," but you do hear "Milano," and I suspect that "Livorno" is used 1000 times as much as "Leghorn." (of course, the ''chicken'' is a Leghorn, but that's another story!) - [[User:BRG|BRG]] 16:34, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
''Just to put my own two cents in (of course, just because it's me, Jtdirl will probably oppose it)'''!!! absolutely not. If you are right, you are right. If you are wrong, you are wrong. It is arguments that matter, not who makes them. :-) [[User:Jtdirl|FearÉIREANN]] 22:35, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
To add my US$0.02, I don't think it makes ''that'' much difference either way. I'm personally more familiar with the name "Brunswick," but I can't say with absolute confidence that that's not because of the other cities named "Brunswick" ("New Brunswick" and so on). As long as there are redirects from one to the other, and both are mentioned at the very beginning, I don't think anyone looking for one or the other will end up confused. And, unlike Gdansk/Danzig and related disputes, this isn't an ethnic dispute, so I think people looking for one are unlikely to be offended if they find it at the other. My slight preference in borderline cases is for local names, perhaps because I prefer things like [[Thessaloniki]] and [[Peloponnesos]] to their Latinized or Anglicized versions. Cases of overwhelming English usage like [[Rome]] (''Roma'') and [[Athens]] (''Athina'') excepted of course. --[[User:Delirium|Delirium]] 22:47, Dec 8, 2003 (UTC)
: I support using English names wherever available. The fact that the name of a city was translated into another language is a sign of its importance. Hence using Brunswick means treating this city with the same respect as Bruxelles, The Hague, or Vienna. -- [[User:134.169.99.111|134.169.99.111]] 10:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
'''Brunswick''' is the English name and has been for decades. Like Munich or Nuremberg. Look at all the authoritative sources... --[[User:Bermicourt|Bermicourt]] ([[User talk:Bermicourt|talk]]) 21:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
----
Just a quick explanation for my vote - it seems that from the evidence we've been able to find, and my personal experience, Braunschweig is now by far the most common way the place is referred to in English.
It's not a huge deal either way, however. --[[User:Robert Merkel|Robert Merkel]] 23:41, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
----
I voted for "don't care" because I'm not a native speaker and have no idea what the more common English name is. I thought it was Brunswick, but seem to have been proven wrong.
However, if the article is moved to [[Braunschweig]], I think that [[Brunswick]] should stay a redirect and not be turned back into a disambiguation page - if it is, it will only continue to collect links, ''all'' of which will refer to [[Braunschweig]]. That's how this whole debate was started, after all. - [[User:Sandman|Sandman]] 19:34, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
----
Requesting an unambiguous vote:
* Braunschweig
*# [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] 21:56, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC) (see above)
*# [[User:Wik|Wik]] 22:01, Dec 8, 2003 (UTC)
*# [[User:Wiwaxia|Wiwaxia]] 22:30, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
*# [[User:Delirium|Delirium]] 22:47, Dec 8, 2003 (UTC) (see above)
*# [[User:Lir|Lirath Q. Pynnor]]
*# [[User:Eloquence|—Eloquence]]
*# [[User:Morven|Morven]] 23:11, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
*# [[User:Robert Merkel|Robert Merkel]] 23:41, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
*# [[User:BRG|BRG]] 15:32, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
* Brunswick
*# [[User:Maximus Rex|Maximus Rex]] 22:08, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
*# [[User:Angela|Angela]][[User talk:Angela|.]] 22:36, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
*# [[User:Jtdirl|FearÉIREANN]] 22:44, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
*#[[User:Hephaestos|Hephaestos]] 05:44, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
*# [[User:Bermicourt|Bermicourt]]21:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
* Don't care
*# [[User:Sandman|Sandman]] 19:34, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
----
I think this vote was wrong. My search led to about 1,150,000 English pages for ''Brunswick Germany''[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en&c2coff=1&as_qdr=all&q=Brunswick+Germany&lr=lang_en] and about 286,000 English pages for ''Braunschweig Germany''[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en&c2coff=1&as_qdr=all&q=Braunschweig+Germany&btnG=Search&lr=lang_en]. Wik's previous search depended on the city name being followed '''immediately''' by the word ''Germany'', but there is no reason why it should. --[[User:Henrygb|Henrygb]] 15:02, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
:I don't think this is worth bringing up again. Please drop it. Google is not definitive besides: there is also the argument based on mentions in English-language media, which favored Braunschweig. [[User:Morven|—Morven]] 18:09, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
== Gdansk vote ==
How does Braunschweig fall under the definition of [[Talk:Gdansk/Vote#VOTE:_Cross-Naming_General|share a history between Germany and Poland]]? It's even west of the Oder. While there is some Wendish history there (hence the suburb of Wenden), Braunschweig is much too far from Poland to fall u
== confused pronouns ==
:"It was also the Garrison Town of the 31st Infanterie Division, which took part in the invasions of Poland, Belgium, France, and Russia. It was one of the units that was destroyed during the withdrawal from Russia at the end of the war. As a result, it was severely damaged by Anglo-American aerial attacks."
"It" seems to refer to both the town and a military unit. I understand that the town was severely damaaged by bombing, but don't see how that obviously follows from a unit based in the town being destroyed during withdrawal from Russia. Presumably the unit was destroyed somewhere between Russia and its garrison, no? [[User:Mike Linksvayer|Mike Linksvayer]] 21:45, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Maybe it also means the garrison buildings in the east of the city which have been the target of many aerial attacks.
== Kohlmarkt ==
The name today is Kohlmarkt, but in former time, the name was Kohlenmarkt or „uppe deme kolemarkede“ or „forum carborum“ (Latin), Look; [[:de:Kohlmarkt (Braunschweig)]] --[[User:Chauki|Chauki]] 17:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
== Hitler and the City of Braunschweig ==
I deleted the information on Hitler and his citizenship as it is wrong.<br>
The author(s) obviously confused two things: 1) the [[Braunschweig|City of Brunswick]] (Stadt Braunschweig) and 2) the [[Free State of Brunswick]] (Freistaat Braunschweig). Both of them go or rather went by the common name of just “Braunschweig”.<br>
However, it was the FREISTAAT Braunschweig or more precisely it’s Interior Minister [[Dietrich Klagges]], an ardent Nazi and member of the [[NSDAP]], together with several other Nazis and right wing politicians, who provided Hitler with the German citizenship he had craved for for seven years.<br>
As a matter of fact, during 1925 and 1932, Hitler himself as well as his Nazis followers had tried at least seven (7) times, to obtain German nationality for the “Führer” - cf. [[de:Einbürgerung Adolf Hitlers]].<br>
Regards form Braunschweig --[[User:Brunswyk|Brunswyk]] 16:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
==Requested move 1==
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:polltop -->
:''The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. ''
The result of the proposal was no consensus for the move. [[User:Philip Baird Shearer|Philip Baird Shearer]] ([[User talk:Philip Baird Shearer|talk]]) 14:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
----
*'''[[:Braunschweig]] → [[:Brunswick (Germany)]]'''
Per [[WP:Use English]]. The article claims that "Brunswick" is archaic but it is still used by some news and wire services like Reuters[http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssConsumerGoodsAndRetailNews/idUSL154416220080115], AFP[http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iEqCMvZ8E39owrUlo6bsc5PIgTzg], and BBC (photo caption)[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/523004.stm] but not AP[http://www.kcbs.com/topic/ap_news.php?story=AP/APTV/National/s/s/TEN--DavisCup-SouthKo]. The town's website (at ''www.brunswick.de'') uses both names [http://www.brunswick.de/english/index.html]. See also [[Talk:Braunschweig#Article name|above]] for a similar discussion from several years ago. — <span style="border:1px solid blue;padding:1px;">[[User talk:AjaxSmack|<span style="color:#fef; background:navy;">''' AjaxSmack '''</span>]]</span> 02:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
===Survey===
:''Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with'' <code><nowiki>*'''Support'''</nowiki></code> ''or'' <code><nowiki>*'''Oppose'''</nowiki></code>'', then sign your comment with'' <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>''. Since [[Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion|polling is not a substitute for discussion]], please explain your reasons, taking into account [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions|Wikipedia's naming conventions]].''
*'''Support''' Per nomination, although if disambiguation by state or another subnational designation is used then I support that. [[User talk:Charles|Charles]] 02:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
*'''Support''' rename to [[Brunswick, Germany]]. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] ([[User talk:Vegaswikian|talk]]) 03:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
*:I should note that I am neutral on the rename from [[Braunschweig]]. If it needs a rename, then my suggested name stands. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] ([[User talk:Vegaswikian|talk]]) 23:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
* Sorry, but the evidence you have given is massively flawed and unrepresentative of English usage in those sources. You have found a mention on BBC News - so what? Search for [http://search.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?tab=ns&q=brunswick+germany&scope=all&uri=%2F Brunswick Germany] and [http://search.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?scope=all&tab=ns&recipe=all&q=braunschweig+germany&x=0&y=0 Braunschweig Germany] on the news part of the website - there are three times more results for Braunschweig. Search on Google news for those two (but make sure you remove hits for "New Brunswick", which make up the bulk) - there are three times more for Braunschweig [http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=brunswick+germany+-%22new+brunswick%22&btnG=Search+News],[http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=braunschweig+germany+-%22new+brunswick%22&btnG=Search]. Reuters is roughly equal in usage. AP archives gets seven times more hits for Braunschweig [http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=APAB&p_theme=apab&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&s_dispstring=brunswick%20germany&p_field_advanced-0=&p_text_advanced-0=(%22brunswick%20germany%22)&xcal_numdocs=20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&xcal_useweights=no], [http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=APAB&p_theme=apab&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&s_dispstring=braunschweig%20germany&p_field_advanced-0=&p_text_advanced-0=(%22braunschweig%20germany%22)&xcal_numdocs=20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&xcal_useweights=no] . The town's website (also at http://www.braunschweig.de/english/index.html it must be noted) uses Braunschweig much, much more commonly in the English section - on my quick examination Brunswick was used only for the title of the city map and the twin-cities sections with Braunschweig everywhere else. Searching for evidence in the places suggested above gives more evidence that the Braunschweig spelling is more common (and therefore the one we should use by UE). [[User:Knepflerle|Knepflerle]] ([[User talk:Knepflerle|talk]]) 14:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''. In any case, either [[Brunswick]] or [[Brunswick, Germany]] would be preferable to the present move target. The first would imply that this is primary use of [[Brunswick]], which is probably true; [[New Brunswick]] is a different matter. [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] <small>[[User talk:Pmanderson|PMAnderson]]</small> 19:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
**Yes, both of those are preferable to [[Brunswick (Germany)]], which needs turning into a redirect once this discussion is over. But I still firmly believe the usage evidence favours Braunschweig first and foremost, and this avoids disambiguation problems we would have with Brunswick (not a determinative factor, but worth consideration). As a WikiProject with a banner above, I will leave a notice on this discussion at WikiProject Germany [[User:Knepflerle|Knepflerle]] ([[User talk:Knepflerle|talk]]) 21:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
*'''Oppose'''. The nomination refers to [[WP:Use English]], which states: "If you are talking about a person, country, town, film, book, or video game, use the most commonly used English version of the name for the article, as you would find it in other encyclopedias and reference works." In my opinion, the most commonly used version in England is "Braunschweig", when referring to the modern German city (but Brunswick for the historical duchy). This usage is also adopted by, for instance, Britannica and Grolier.--[[User:Boson|Boson]] ([[User talk:Boson|talk]]) 22:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
*'''Weak oppose'''. Both names are commonly used in English (see discussion), Braunschweig is less ambiguous. [[User:Markussep|Markussep]] <sup>[[User talk:Markussep|Talk]]</sup> 09:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
*'''oppose''' [[User:Imars|imars]] ([[User talk:Imars|talk]]) 15:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''', insufficient evidence that Brunswick is more common than Braunschweig, which is less ambiguous (besides the place is the source of name [[Braunschweiger]] -- renaming the place article would obscure that connection. [[User:Bkonrad|older]] ≠ [[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]] 17:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
*'''Oppose.''' The translation is a technical thing. Braunschweig is the more common name. [[User:Kingjeff|Kingjeff]] ([[User talk:Kingjeff|talk]]) 20:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' per Markussep. - [[User:52 Pickup|<span style="color:#1E90FF;">'''52 Pickup'''</span>]] [[User_talk:52 Pickup|<sup><span style="color:purple;">(deal)</span></sup>]] 16:15, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
*'''Weak support'''. The disambiguation page [[Brunswick]] refers to two ''Braunschweige'': The city (''[[Braunschweig]]''); and the duchy once seated there ([[Braunschweig (region)|''Braunschweig'' (region)]]), disestablished 2004 (''see also [[Lower Saxony]] (''Niedersachsen'')'' ). Confusion with [[Brunswick-Lüneburg]] and [[Duchy of Brunswick]] should be avoided; I concur in part with nom but recommend an alternate rename to '''Brunswick, Germany''' per [[User:Septentrionalis]]. The name Braunschweig is used in English specific to the subject of this Article, so may be kept to avoid confusion with multiple Cities of Brunswick around the world. [[User:B.C.Schmerker|B. C. Schmerker]] ([[User talk:B.C.Schmerker|talk]]) 06:41, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
===Discussion===
:''Any additional comments:''
This is a common misconception that needs putting to bed. We don't use an non-indigenous "English" name just because it exists and this is exactly '''not''' what WP:UE says. We don't have articles at [[Ratisbon]], [[Coblence]], [[Leghorn]], [[Trento|Trent]] - we have them at [[Regensburg]], [[Koblenz]], [[Livorno]] and [[Trento]] because these are the names used in English ''more often'' even though they're identical to the indigenous names. The fact that an exonym exists used only in English which is different to the indigenous name does not over-rule predominance of usage. And what is more English than what English uses the most? UE says explicitly to use what is used most often in English, not what is "most English" by some unspecified yardstick. [[User:Knepflerle|Knepflerle]] ([[User talk:Knepflerle|talk]]) 14:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
*Right in principle, but we should probably use [[Trent]]; certainly [[Council of Trent]]. [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] <small>[[User talk:Pmanderson|PMAnderson]]</small> 19:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
** Definitely agree on [[Council of Trent]], glad it's there already. Trent over [[Trento]] would surprise me, and cause extra disambiguation problems (as here) but we'd have to look at the evidence of usage first. [[User:Knepflerle|Knepflerle]] ([[User talk:Knepflerle|talk]]) 21:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
::There is a guideline on [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)]] how to determine the most commonly used name.
::*Step 1: recent encyclopedias: [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9016276/Braunschweig Britannica] has Braunschweig, [http://www.bartleby.com/65/br/BrunswicCit.html Columbia] and [http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761562958/Brunswick_(city_Germany).html Encarta] have Brunswick. So that's undecided.
::*Step 2: Google Scholar and Google Books. Google Scholar is useless because of the number of authors named Braunschweig. Google Books, books from the period 1958-2008, added "city" or "town" to remove false hits in other languages and for the medieval state: [http://books.google.com/books?as_q=braunschweig&num=10&hl=nl&as_brr=0&btnG=Google+zoeken&as_epq=&as_oq=city+town&as_eq=&as_libcat=0&as_brr=0&lr=lang_en&as_vt=&as_auth=&as_pub=&as_drrb=c&as_miny=1958&as_maxy=2008&as_isbn= Braunschweig 1141], [http://books.google.com/books?as_q=brunswick&num=10&lr=lang_en&hl=nl&as_brr=0&btnG=Google+zoeken&as_epq=&as_oq=city+town&as_eq=&as_libcat=0&as_brr=0&lr=lang_en&as_vt=&as_auth=&as_pub=&as_drrb=c&as_miny=1958&as_maxy=2008&as_isbn= Brunswick 5120], but most of the hits are for New Brunswick, or the Brunswicks in Georgia, Maine, and England. I added "Lower Saxony" to get rid of these: [http://books.google.com/books?as_q=brunswick&num=10&lr=lang_en&hl=nl&as_brr=0&btnG=Google+zoeken&as_epq=lower-saxony&as_oq=town+city&as_eq=&as_libcat=0&as_brr=0&lr=lang_en&as_vt=&as_auth=&as_pub=&as_drrb=c&as_miny=1958&as_maxy=2008&as_isbn= Brunswick 431], [http://books.google.com/books?as_q=braunschweig&num=10&lr=lang_en&hl=nl&as_brr=0&btnG=Google+zoeken&as_epq=lower-saxony&as_oq=town+city&as_eq=&as_libcat=0&as_brr=0&lr=lang_en&as_vt=&as_auth=&as_pub=&as_drrb=c&as_miny=1958&as_maxy=2008&as_isbn= Braunschweig 264]. Not a big difference.
::*skipped Step 3, I don't have those histories at hand.
::*Step 4: News sources, I tried Google News, again using "Lower Saxony" as a filter. [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=braunschweig+lower-saxony&btnG=Search+Archives&num=10&lr=lang_en&as_ldate=1958&as_hdate=2008&lr=lang_en Braunschweig 184], [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=brunswick+lower-saxony&btnG=Search+Archives&num=10&lr=lang_en&as_ldate=1958&as_hdate=2008&lr=lang_en Brunswick 109]. Again, not a big difference.
::It looks like both Braunschweig and Brunswick are both commonly used in English. I would suggest keeping the article where it is, since Brunswick is heavily ambiguous. [[User:Markussep|Markussep]] <sup>[[User talk:Markussep|Talk]]</sup> 09:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
</div>
== Economy and more ==
I'm not from Braunschweig but from Germany and I think there is a lack of information about the economy of Braunschweig: The city is located in an area that is important for Volkswagen AG: In 1938 the first Volkswagen plant has been foundet in Braunschweig. Todays Volkswagen Headquarters are in Wolfsburg (about 36km by car from Braunschweig), the Volkswagen Commercial Vehicle Division is in Hannover (about 77km by car), there is a plant for Volkswagen-Parts in neighboring city of Salzgitter (only 13km south of Braunschweig) and also a volkswagen-plant for component-parts IN BRAUNSCHWEIG - more Information: [http://www.volkswagen-braunschweig.de/ http://www.volkswagen-braunschweig.de/ (also in english)]<br />
Further Volkswagen Financial Services AG and Volkswagen Bank GmbH have their headquarters in the city of Braunschweig. From their website:<br />
''"Volkswagen Financial Services AG is a 100%-owned subsidiary of Volkswagen AG and has its headquarters in Braunschweig, Germany. We are responsible for coordinating the worldwide financial services activities of the Volkswagen Group. In Europe, Asia-Pacific and South America we manage the financial services operations directly via subsidiaries."''<br />
Further there is an Siemens plant from Siemens Transportation Systems which develops and produces Signal Technology for the railroad. It developed important technology for Shanghai Transrapid.<br />
Further I'm wondering why there is a so prominent information about German Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Investigation (BFU) (an agency most germans just don't know about) - but no information about the 'Luftfahrtbundesamt' (LBA) -> German Federal Agency of Aviation.<br />
A few years ago they rebuilt their [[Brunswick Palace]] (destroyed in and after WW2) with reconstructed facades and a modern and large Shopping-Centre inside - namend the "Schloss-Arkaden" (Palace Arcards)<br />
Greetings - [[User:TomGaribaldi|TomGaribaldi]] ([[User talk:TomGaribaldi|talk]]) 15:00, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
== Requested Move 2: MOVE TO BRUNSWICK!!! ==
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following discussion is an archived discussion of a [[WP:requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a [[Wikipedia:move review|move review]]. No further edits should be made to this section. ''
The result of the move request was: '''Not moved''' [[User:Mike Cline|Mike Cline]] ([[User talk:Mike Cline|talk]]) 01:19, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
----
[[Braunschweig]] → {{no redirect|Brunswick}} – <s>I was born in Brunswick, and moved to Wilmette, IL 5 years ago. As someone who lived there for more than 2 decades, I can say that Brunswick is the most common English Name. We were taught to call is Brunswick in English. I consider exonyms such as Brunswick a great honor, as they are a sign my beautiful birthplace was/is internationally important enough to earn the English name. However, if my experience did not support a move to Brunswick, I would not suggest it, no matter how much it means to me. Fortunatley, however, Brunswick remains the most common English name among the inhabitants. Only one American knew what it was, and called it Brunswick. (P.S. I have read Wikipedia for years and registered this account to make this proposal. However, I have no editing experience, so forgive me if I have made this proposal incorrectly) [[User:DukeOfBrunswick|DukeOfBrunswick]] ([[User talk:DukeOfBrunswick|talk]]) 18:08, 21 August 2012 (UTC)</s>
* <s>'''Support''' As someone who's mother is from Brunswick it is clear to me that Brunswick is the preferred and more common English form. [[User:KaiserWilly|KaiserWilly]] ([[User talk:KaiserWilly|talk]]) 18:14, 21 August 2012 (UTC)</s>
* '''Admin note''': Both DukeOfBrunswick and KaiserWilly have been confirmed as sockpuppets of OttomanJackson. Their !votes have consequently been struck. [[User:Favonian|Favonian]] ([[User talk:Favonian|talk]]) 20:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
* '''Strong Support''' I got KaiserWilly's message, and after reading through this discussion, I believe the evidence to be in Brunswick's favor. As a native monolingual Anglophone, I have to say Brunswick is much more familiar to me. Also, this city is most important to Anglophones in a historic context ([[Duchy of Brunswick]]), when the city was exclusively known as Brunswick in English. This, combined with ngrams (link below) showing Brunswick to be about 9 times more common than Braunschweig (Bronswiek, the name in the local dialect is never used in English and does not show up) leads me to strongly support a move to Brunswick. [http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Brunswick%2C+Bronswiek%2C+Braunschweig&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=0&smoothing=3 Ngrams] [[User:OttomanJackson|OttomanJackson]] ([[User talk:OttomanJackson|talk]]) 20:00, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
** <s>[[WP:CANVASSING]] - Please explain, what do you mean "I got KaiserWilly's message"?</s>
*** Scratch that, [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KaiserWilly]], I am getting so fed up of this sort of stuff. To assist the change of title on a web encyclopaedia?... Come on. [[User:In ictu oculi|In ictu oculi]] ([[User talk:In ictu oculi|talk]]) 03:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' Braunschweig is commonly used in English language media (what you learn in Germany isn't all that relevant there). Pretty much all the arguments from the old discussions are still valid - the google books search will give you results not only for the state, but also New Brunswick, and the Brunswicks in the US, etc. I searched the websites of CNN, the BBC, The Times (of London), and all use Braunschweig in recent news items. The Times uses Brunswick more often, but the difference isn't that big, and most of the time it happens in articles on a historical topic (WWII and Anniversaries). So since there's no definite conclusion either way and it's certainly more practical to leave the article at Braunschweig (less ambiguous) I see no need to move the article at all.[[User:Alexpostfacto|Alexpostfacto]] ([[User talk:Alexpostfacto|talk]]) 21:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' - firstly because of the, sorry, original research in the proposal. Secondly because of the possible element of [[WP:Canvassing]], thirdly because of sources. 2000 onward sources show that Brunswick is an old Napoleonic [[English exonym]], like [[Leghorn]], which has passed out of use. Compare [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22braunschweig%22+%22european+union%22&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1 "Braunschweig" + "European Union" 3030 results] to [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22brunswick%22+%22european+union%22&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1 "Brunswick" + "European Union" zero results when "New Brunswick" excluded]. See also city website [http://www.braunschweig.de/english/ Welcome to Braunschweig]. GNews, etc. etc. [[User:In ictu oculi|In ictu oculi]] ([[User talk:In ictu oculi|talk]]) 02:51, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
*'''Support''' this clearly has an English-language name, [[WP:UE]]. -- [[Special:Contributions/76.65.128.252|76.65.128.252]] ([[User talk:76.65.128.252|talk]]) 04:02, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''. ''[http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0809232.html Columbia]'' uses "Brunswick", as does [http://www.dpa.de/en/stylebook/places.htm DPA], the German press agency. ''[http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/78035/Braunschweig Britannica]'' and [http://web.archive.org/web/20090428101829/http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761562955/Brunswick_(historic_region).html Encarta] both use "Braunschweig". <s>I'd like to see [[Braunschweig (region)]] moved to Brunswick, which is how Encarta does it.</s>[[User:Kauffner|Kauffner]] ([[User talk:Kauffner|talk]]) 04:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
**'''Oppose'''. ''[http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,1474038,00.html Deutsche Welle]'' uses "Braunschweig" for the city, "Brunswick" for the state. In a German history context, "Brunswick" generally means the duchy or the state. So it's less confusing if the city is called something else. [[User:Kauffner|Kauffner]] ([[User talk:Kauffner|talk]]) 16:31, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
:[[Braunschweig (region)]] does not refer to the state of Brunswick, those articles are already under [[Duchy of Brunswick]] and [[Free State of Brunswick]]. The article BS (region) is about one of the four post-WWII administrative regions of Lower Saxony, so it makes sense to have the same name as the city. The administrative regions were of extremely minor political importance, however - they basically consisted of a (non-elected) bureaucracy [[User:Alexpostfacto|Alexpostfacto]] ([[User talk:Alexpostfacto|talk]]) 05:40, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''', there is no evidence that the modern german city is the primary topic for the term. [[User:Bkonrad|older]] ≠ [[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]] 11:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
* '''Comment'''. This move is malformed and should have been proposed as a multi-page move as it also affects the disambiguation page. In addition, the vote tallying below is offensive. [[User:Bkonrad|older]] ≠ [[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]] 11:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
* '''Support'''. I've known it as Brunswick all my life. It's close enough to the dialect name too.[[User:Bmcln1|Bmcln1]] ([[User talk:Bmcln1|talk]]) 14:12, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''', per In ictu oculi. Some English-language names are historic or archaic, like Leghorn for [[Livorno]], Italy, or Elsinore for [[Helsingør]], Denmark. This seems to be a similar case. — [[User:P.T. Aufrette|P.T. Aufrette]] ([[User talk:P.T. Aufrette|talk]]) 16:03, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''', for reasons given above. The Brunswick disambiguation page correctly states that it is an historical name for the city in English ---[[User:Ehrenkater|Ehrenkater]] ([[User talk:Ehrenkater|talk]]) 16:10, 22 August 2012 (UTC).
*'''Oppose''' Primarily per In ictu oculi. This is more like [[Koblenz]] than [[Cologne]]; just because there's an English version of the name doesn't mean it's the right one to use. This is probably just reflective of my own biases, but when I hear "Brunswick," I think of [[New Brunswick]] and [[Brunswick stew]]. And now I'm hungry. --[[User:BDD|BDD]] ([[User talk:BDD|talk]]) 16:25, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
*I've also moved the vote-counting section. It's common enough for someone to add these, but they're almost always removed, and I notice not everyone was using it anyway. --[[User:BDD|BDD]] ([[User talk:BDD|talk]]) 16:25, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
*'''Support''' per evidence provided by others in the discussion as well as that in earlier discussions [[#Article name|above]] and that I presented in a [[#Requested move 1|previous move request]]. — [[User talk:AjaxSmack|<span style="border:1px solid #000073;background:#4D4DA6;padding:2px;color:#F9FFFF;text-shadow:black 0.2em 0.2em 0.3em"><span style="font-family:Georgia;"> '''AjaxSmack''' </span></span>]] 03:50, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' Per numerous arguments above. Not only does the disambiguation page state that Brunswick is a historical name for the city, but, as noted above, there is no evidence that this is the primary topic for "Brunswick". Cheers, [[User:Zaldax|Zaldax]] ([[User talk:Zaldax|talk]]) 16:43, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' When IIO and Kaufner agree it must be snowing. Recommend speedy close. [[User:Agathoclea|Agathoclea]] ([[User talk:Agathoclea|talk]]) 12:10, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
::It is encouraging to see Kauffner's changed vote I admit. [[User:In ictu oculi|In ictu oculi]] ([[User talk:In ictu oculi|talk]]) 03:17, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' To override the native spelling of 'Braunschweig' there should be clear majority support for 'Brunswick' in current reliable English sources to establish 'Brunswick' as established usage per [[WP:UE]]. That does not seem to be the case here. Purely FYI, in The Netherlands the reference is always to 'Braunschweig'.--[[User:Wolbo|Wolbo]] ([[User talk:Wolbo|talk]]) 10:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a [[WP:RM|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a [[WP:move review|move review]]. No further edits should be made to this section.''</div><!-- Template:RM bottom -->
== British crown ==
Article says, “[Henry the Lion] had previously established ties to the British crown in 1168,” but there was no British crown until centuries later, only English, Scottish etc. crowns. This “British crown” notion is in the source (German National Tourist Board), so can this be changed and still claim authority from the GNTB source? (I guess putting “[''sic'']” in there would look a bit odd, as it’s not given as a quote.) '''[[User talk:1A72|1A72 talk]]''' 05:51, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
:I've changed it into "English crown". I don't think the reference needs to be changed, though - it's hardly a controversial issue. My guess would be that the mention of the British crown was mentioned because of the Hanoverian succession later on, which made those ties relevant for modern Britain. At least that's the reason why I didn't make the change earlier myself, when I rewrote parts of the history section. [[User:Alexpostfacto|Alexpostfacto]] ([[User talk:Alexpostfacto|talk]]) 17:16, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
::Thanks! '''[[User talk:1A72|1A72]]''' 23:50, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
== External links modified ==
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to {{plural:2|one external link|2 external links}} on [[Braunschweig]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=678263209 my edit]. If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150425095907/http://www.braunschweig.de/politik_verwaltung/politik/stadtbezirksraete/index.html to http://www.braunschweig.de/politik_verwaltung/politik/stadtbezirksraete/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120219051419/http://www.bfu-web.de/cln_007/nn_228094/EN/The_20BFU/Location/location__node.html?__nnn=true to http://www.bfu-web.de/cln_007/nn_228094/EN/The_20BFU/Location/location__node.html?__nnn=true
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}
Cheers. —[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 09:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
== [[Timeline of Braunschweig]] ==
What is missing from the recently created [[Timeline of Braunschweig|city timeline]] article? Please add relevant content! Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- [[User:M2545|M2545]] ([[User talk:M2545|talk]]) 12:20, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
== External links modified ==
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified {{plural:2|one external link|2 external links}} on [[Braunschweig]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=748295911 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110517074103/http://www.thecityofbath.co.uk/twinning-associations to http://www.thecityofbath.co.uk/twinning-associations
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/628oflRIh?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.braunbattleoftheyear.com%2Fabout.html to http://www.braunbattleoftheyear.com/about.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}).
{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}
Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 13:45, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
== External links modified ==
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on [[Braunschweig]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=792159774 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130107095744/http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/sites/130225 to http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/sites/130225
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 20:56, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
== Added to ja:wiki ==
<small>Section title (Added to [[:ja:Special:Permalink/65212640|jawiki {{nihongo|ブラウンシュヴァイク}} as of 2017-08-21T16:33:58 ]]) moved to resolve bolded error notice. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Braunschweig&diff=796745378&oldid=792159776 original]. [[User:Moonraker12|Moonraker12]] ([[User talk:Moonraker12|talk]]) 01:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC) </small>
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Braunschweig&oldid=792159774 Braunschweig#Demography] was added to the Japanese page on {{nihongo|ブラウンシュヴァイク#人口統計|the Demography in Braunschweig}} and for [https://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E3%83%96%E3%83%A9%E3%82%A6%E3%83%B3%E3%82%B7%E3%83%A5%E3%83%B4%E3%82%A1%E3%82%A4%E3%82%AF&diff=prev&oldid=65212640 this diff]. --[[User:Omotecho|Omotecho]] ([[User talk:Omotecho|talk]]) 20:17, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
== External links modified ==
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on [[Braunschweig]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=802703771 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160215060249/http://braunschweig.de/politik_verwaltung/nachrichten/medien/stapak2015_Bevoelkerung_in_StBez_folder.pdf to http://www.braunschweig.de/politik_verwaltung/nachrichten/medien/stapak2015_Bevoelkerung_in_StBez_folder.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 22:36, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
== Potential error in the immigration section ==
The nationality table in the immigration section is titled as 2024, but the cited source is dated 18.09.2014, and makes no reference to the statistics being projections.[[User:WhatWouldKantDo|WhatWouldKantDo]] ([[User talk:WhatWouldKantDo|talk]]) 14:55, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
== Description of images incorrect ==
Reading the description under the first images, it doesn't seem to make sense. Clockwise from top, second should be the Happy Rizzi house. Also, none of the images contain the Brunswick Lion as far as I can tell. Not changing it since I don't know which description belongs to which picture.
Full text:
Clockwise from top: Castle Square with Brunswick Cathedral, Dankwarderode Castle and the Brunswick Lion, Happy Rizzi House, Town Hall, Brunswick Palace, Old Town market with the Church of Saint Martin and the Alte Waage with the Church of Saint Andrew [[User:Xzpx|Xzpx]] ([[User talk:Xzpx|talk]]) 01:34, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
:Description is correct.. Castle Square with Cathedral, Castle and Lion is all in the first picture. Rizzi House is the second picture.. But it should get a better structure.. --[[User:Jonny84|Jonny84]] ([[User talk:Jonny84|talk]]) 21:50, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
==Braunschweig or Brunswick==
<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 08:01, 7 November 2021 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1636272078}}
Should the name of this article be ‘Braunschweig’ or ‘Brunswick’, A previous discussion claims that ‘Brunswick’ is dated such as how Leghorn, Coblence, Trent and Ratisbon are. This is inaccurate, ‘Braunschweig’ and ‘Brunswick’ are used equally by English sources. ‘Brunswick’ is used by Google Maps<ref> https://www.google.com/maps/place/Brunswick,+Germany/@52.2721095,10.3878015,11z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x47aff5d58a00663b:0x425ac6d94ac3ab0!8m2!3d52.2681574!4d10.5276489 </ref>, Columbia<ref> https://www.encyclopedia.com/places/germany-scandinavia-and-central-europe/german-political-geography/brunswick-state </ref>, and The Times of London<ref> https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/what-happens-next-to-madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-zx2thrcxc </ref>, whereas ‘Braunschweig’ is used by Britannica<ref> https://www.britannica.com/place/Braunschweig-Germany </ref>, The Washington Post<ref> https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/german-police-dig-through-garden-in-mccann-investigation/2020/07/28/8fb17572-d0bf-11ea-826b-cc394d824e35_story.html </ref> and the official website<ref> https://www.braunschweig.de/ </ref>. The New York Times uses both interchangeably<ref> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/17/realestate/house-hunting-in-germany.html </ref><ref> https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/10/business/international/vw-manager-in-germany-is-said-to-have-pushed-for-removing-evidence.html </ref>. Could I have some opinions on the name of this city please. [[User:Ale3353|Ale3353]] ([[User talk:Ale3353|talk]]) 07:51, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
{{reflisttalk}}
* ''' ‘Braunschweig’ ''' Based on what's already on the official website. [[User:Sea Ane|Sea Ane]] ([[User talk:Sea Ane|talk]]) 18:20, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
* ''' ‘Brunswick’ ''' {{sbb}} fairly weakly, Brunswick still seems to be commonname in English. Like many other German place names, ''(inc 'Germany' itself)'' English commonname bears - at best - only a passing resemblance to the name in German, so local use is irrelevant - I see a weak current preference for the older form in English. [[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 05:44, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
*'''Brunswick''', per [[WP:COMMONNAME]] and its overwhelming use in English compared to Braunschweig. [https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Braunschweig%2CBrunswick&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3&direct_url=t1%3B%2CBraunschweig%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CBrunswick%3B%2Cc0 Ngrams] tells us that in English, Brunswick remains significantly more common, while [https://trends.google.com.au/trends/explore?q=Braunschweig,Brunswick Google trends] tells us the same, with the only country preferring Braunschweig being Germany - and as we seek the most common name in English, we must ignore that. However, I must ask - why is this an RfC rather than an RM? [[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] ([[User talk:BilledMammal|talk]]) 00:52, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
::[[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] I didn’t make it an RM because I was unsure on which name was more common. Now that I have had some more evidence that ‘Brunswick’ is more commonly used in English, I may consider making this an RM. [[User:Ale3353|Ale3353]] ([[User talk:Ale3353|talk]]) 12:49, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
*Danzig (just kidding, for the people who remember 2005) '''Braunschweig'''. Following the guidelines at [[WP:PLACE]], "When a widely accepted English name, in a modern context, exists for a place, we should use it." Disagree there's a widely accepted English name given Washington Post usage. Then, "if neither of these English names exist, the modern official name (in articles dealing with the present)." As such, We should use the official name, which appears to be Braunschweig. That said, my preference is extremely soft and I should not be used to block what is otherwise a consensus. [[User:Hipocrite|Hipocrite]] ([[User talk:Hipocrite|talk]]) 15:09, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
| |||