Talk:Vlaams Blok

message: Is this correct: "Because of Belgian funding laws the party was effectively banned."? Has the party been really banned? I don't think so. Can anybody confirm? -- Edcolins 19:28, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: As I understand it, what the party could loose is is its public funding as well as its fund raising associations, not its existence as such. Anyway, the sentence has been brought to appeal and will have no consequences until confirmed.
Some details on the "cordon sanitaire" (the ban by other parties that doesn't allow a coalition between Vlaams Blok and other parties) should definitely be discussed on the Vlaams Blok page. --Aliekens
The verdict got confirmed  but the head of the flemish parlament says he is not willing to kill the funding of the party. --pvaneynd 14:26, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banned, really? 

message: Anonymous I.P. added here on Nov 25-26, 2004 a long text which is a mere copy of a blog entry elsewhere (by the same author, I suspect). Original here. Removed from this talk page by --FvdP 17:24, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The true story of Roeland Raes (and of the fatal trial in Ghent)

message: Like it was done for Vlaams Belang, this article should probably move to Vlaams Blok (short discussion in Talk:Vlaams Belang#Name). I can't do that because [Vlaams Blok] already redirects to here : admin wanted. --FvdP 17:29, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done now. —Nightstallion (?) 09:44, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to [Vlaams Blok] 

message: I changed far-right to right-wing. Nothing in this article shows Vlaams Blok is "far-right", and that term isn't much more than an invective, anyway. I also took out "The party had been characterised by the international media as being neo-nazi, racist and openly antisemitic"—this kind of broad generalization needs to be sourced, if it is to be included at all. - Nat Krause 08:25, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed from intro

message: Could somebody please explain for non-dutch/flemish speakers, the difference between 'Vlaams' and 'Vlaamse'? Why is the page located at 'Vlaams Blok' but the article begins 'Vlaamse Blok'?
:I think it was a typo. -- C mon 07:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a typo, because "Vlaams Blok" is a proper noun. Used as a common noun, "a Flemish bloc" would be translated as "een Vlaams blok", where as "the Flemish bloc" would be "het Vlaamse blok" and "(the) Flemish blocs" would be "(de) Vlaamse blokken". (See also Declension) --LucVerhelst 07:41, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vlaams/Vlaamse 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Vlaams Blok. 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/20110223222339/http://www.flemishrepublic.org/ to http://www.flemishrepublic.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:10, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified