Talk:United Kingdom of the Netherlands

message: in the text it says that the French translation is 'Royaume uni des Pays-Bas', seem legit mright? but in the text-block-thingy on the right it says that it's 'Royaume des Belgiques' which seems odd. but im no moderator so what do i know.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.201.250.19 (talk) 17:21, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  French translation 

message: I understand why the article is called this, but I think it's misleading.  As far as I know, the "United Kingdom of the Netherlands" is a name only applied to this state after the fact.  While it existed it was just called the "Kingdom of the Netherlands".  At the time, there was no risk of confusion from this - the Netherlands was a term that applied to the whole reason, and that was, in fact, more particularly applied to the southern areas, which had been the Austrian Netherlands (while the Northern parts were, in English at least, usually called the United Provinces or Holland).  I think that it's still useful to have a separate article for this, as it should be distinguished from the current Kingdom of the Netherlands in some way, but I think we should be more clear that this was not, in fact, a name actually used at the time. john 04:10 23 May 2003 (UTC)
:How they referred to the Kingdom at that time is one factor you could consider. You could also look at how the scientific literature (or popular literature) refers to it nowadays. There seems to be at least a fair number of scientific sources that refer to "Verenigd Koninkrijk der Nederlanden" and in fact, if I search for "Koninkrijk der Nederlanden" and 1815, it mostly refers to Verenigd Koninkrijk der Nederlanden. There might be more analysis that leads to another conclusion, but I think we can't assume that the contemporary name is automatically the title. effeietsanders 04:49, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose per Effeietsanders and WP:COMMONNAME. Plenty of former states had official names other than they have been given in historiography, such as "Byzantine Empire" (coined 16th century), "Kievan Rus'" (coined 19th century), etc. Thr opening sentence already says that "United Kingdom of the Netherlands" was the "unofficial name" given to it. If we really want to clarify this, we can always add a footnote, but it is not "misleading" at all as an article title. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 05:53, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

text: Support I think this article should be moved from United Kingdom of the Netherlands → Kingdom of the Netherlands (1815–1839). PadFoot2008 (talk) 04:28, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: United Kingdom of the Netherlands

message: The text at the image of the map states: "2 Duchy of Limburg (In the German Confederacy after 1839 as compensation for Waals-Luxemburg)", which strikes me as odd. I can't find any reference to this in the article on the Duchy of Limburg, nor in other articles. A link to an article which explains it in more detail might be adding value? effeietsanders 13:08, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  German confederacy 

message: Dutch is extremely close to English, its no mistake it corresponds exactly to "united kingdom". The citation needed is extremely justified, and should probably be reverted to the better translation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.65.0.169 (talk) 23:57, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Syntax on name

message: I know the name is not official, but in Dutch it was referred to as "Koninkrijk der Verenigde Nederlanden", which translates better to "Kingdom of the United Netherlands". Gerard von Hebel (talk) 16:49, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Substituted at 09:35, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: The sentence, "Many people's welfare improved in the south lived in poverty because the profits of trade were used for big projects.", makes absolutely no sense. Unless the language is double-dutch. 93.155.218.31 (talk) 01:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economic and social development