Overleg gebruiker:Io Herodotus

Schermermeer

Hallo Laurentleap, ik heb je artikel Schermermeer ter beoordeling aan de gemeenschap voorgelegd omdat ik het (in deze vorm) niet geschikt acht voor Wikipedia. Wellicht heb je er iets aan om de conventies door te lezen; daar kun je zien hoe een artikel eruit hoort te zien. Zie ook Help:Waarom staat mijn artikel op de beoordelingslijst. Je kunt eventueel commentaar achterlaten op de lijst. Onderteken je bericht met vier tildes (~~~~). Veel plezier op Wikipedia! - C (o) 2 jun 2012 14:08 (CEST)

Beste Laurentheap, ik ben door je bijdrage gaan studeren op de Schermer. Het klopt niet wat je schrijft, toen de polder nog een meer was heette ze Scher-meer of Scher-mer. De naam Schermermeer wordt tegenwoordig wel gebruikt voor een stukje meer dat nog over is. Ik maak een redirect van je bladzijde naar Schermer (droogmakerij). Dat leuke kaartje heb ik er ook in gezet. Koosg (overleg) 2 jun 2012 21:14 (CEST)

Lichtlijnen haven Rotterdam

Hello Romaine
The picture :Lichtlijnen haven Rotterdam.png probably needs updating with the construction of Tweede Maasvlakte. What do you think ?
Laurentleap (overleg) 26 okt 2012 12:15 (CEST)

Hello Laurentleap, Is possible, but it doesn't effect the lightlines and I do not exactly know where the Tweede Maasvlakte ends in the west. Greetings - Romaine (overleg) 27 okt 2012 00:55 (CEST)

Interwiki Binnenstad

Salut Laurent,

Tu t'es sûrement trompé, mais t'as remplacé l'interwiki français sur la page Binnenstad (fr:centre historique) par fr:Binnenstad - j'ai dû le corriger.

Bonne journée. - netraaM • 12 dec 2012 14:58 (CET)

Une page française sur fr:Binnenstad a été crée. Elle fait référence au fr:centre historique mais uniquement néerlandais. C'est pourquoi j'avais mis ce lien. En réfléchissant cette page n'existe qu'en français, puisque dans la langue néerlandaise ce mot fait référence à tous les centres villes. Bonne journée. Laurentleap (overleg) 12 dec 2012 16:32 (CET)

Excuse-moi, je croyais que tu t'étais trompé. J'aurais dû mieux regarder. Vous avez un bel article sur le binnenstad de Maestricht d'ailleurs. - netraaM • 12 dec 2012 16:43 (CET)

Bewerking

Uw paar woorden in het engels op andermans gebruikerspagina heb ik verwijderd. Mocht u deze gebruiker een bericht willen sturen dan kunt u dat plaatsen op diens overlegpagina. MoiraMoira _overleg 7 mrt 2013 10:11 (CET)

Uitdieping van de Schelde

on Uitdieping van de Schelde section "Einde van de werken". "Deze werken behoren tot de derde verdieping van de Schelde. Langs Vlaamse kant is een vierde verdieping niet uitgesloten. Nederland denkt hier anders over."

The automatic translator talks about 3rd and 4th deepening is this correct ? When was the first and second one ? I have started to translate Hedwigepolder, it's difficult this translator is often wrong. Best regards. Io Herodotus (overleg) 13 jun 2013 12:19 (CEST)

Hey Io Herodotus, maybe this link will help you: http://www.steltkluut.nl/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/lente-2013.pdf (from page 10. Kind regards Saeftinghe kenner (overleg) 17 jun 2013 08:14 (CEST)

Computervertaling

This is the Dutch Wikipedia
Dear Io Herodotus, if you wish for an article to be translated, please state your request here. Please do not use any software-based translation services or tools, as these would produce very low-quality results and your article would be removed from the Dutch Wikipedia. Please do not add any articles or contribute to articles in any language other than Dutch.

Zijbalk

Bonjour! Sorry for writing this in English, but my French is rather poor. I noticed you added the {{Zijbalk Zuiderzeewerken}} to a number of articles. However, most of the times it was placed at or even below the {{Appendix}} (references) and this template is not meant for that purpose. The {{Navigatie Zuiderzeewerken}} is, and that template was already in most of these articles. For that reason, I have removed the Zijbalk template in most cases. Richard 29 jun 2015 14:11 (CEST)

OK, I understand. What is the best thing, a map or a list? A map is easy to have a good idea of what we talk about. This is true for French readers who are not familiar with geography, I don't know about Dutch people. You know better than me. Regards.Io Herodotus (overleg) 1 jul 2015 15:14 (CEST)

I don't object to using a map for navigation. It's just that the size and placement of that map made a visual mess of most articles it was placed in, and the navigatie template covered everything as well. In some cases, the map was okay (e.g. Amsteldiepdijk and Proefpolder Andijk) and in Knardijk I have done some reformatting (by the way: in that article, the map was not added by you). Richard 1 jul 2015 15:24 (CEST)

The size was too big, you're right. I have reduced it. By the way, I don't know how to remove those spots on the left of "zeewater", "zoet water" etc. (so as to achieve something like the french version). Regards--Io Herodotus (overleg) 1 jul 2015 19:28 (CEST)

The new size is an improvement. Still, I think it should not be placed 'below' the article. It is designed to be a side bar and as such, it should preferably be placed next to the article (like an infobox). That is why it's aligned to the right by default. Still, by placing it in a single-celled table

Afsluitdijk (32) Amstel­diep­dijk (24) Amsterdam Houtrib­dijk (75) IJsselmeer Knardijk (56) Marken Markermeer N.O-polder (42) O. Flevoland (57) Proefpolder Andijk (27) Schokland Urk Waddenzee Wieringer­meer (30) Wieringen Z. Flevoland (67) droogmakerij oude land zoetwater zeewater De Zuiderzeewerken en enkele locaties die daardoor sterk beïnvloed zijn. De getallen zijn de jaartallen van aanleg, in de 20e eeuw. De Afsluitdijk is uit 1932.

it's possible to position it to the left. Add an appropriate header (e.g. == Overzicht Zuiderzeewerken ==) and you can place it right before the external links and/or references.

As for the 'spots': I have done a bit of experimenting and you can eliminate them by adding 'marksize=1' to the {{Positiekaart~}} parameters. When you do that, the coördinates have to be a adjusted a bit as well. I think lat_deg=53.020 for Droogmakerij, lat_deg=52.990 for Oude land, lat_deg=52.960 for Zoet water and lat_deg=52.930 for Zeewater turned out pretty good. Have a look at it and let me know what you think. Richard 2 jul 2015 10:18 (CEST)

I see you have removed some other spots as well. Nice work! I would have suggested the same (depending on how you felt about the change, which is pretty obvious now). Richard 2 jul 2015 19:51 (CEST)

Thank you very much, I did the same for the Deltawerken.--Io Herodotus (overleg) 2 jul 2015 22:15 (CEST)

So I noticed. Richard 3 jul 2015 10:15 (CEST)

Markerwaard

Hello again. Would you have a map of the markerwaard from the 80's or something like that. I think I should have one which is a Michelin road map (if I find it). The reason is the map on the article is an early map by Lely. There are more recent ones with the bordering lakes.
Also what is the reason why they don't build an airport on the South part of the lake, it seems to me that it would be a good place for that, no houses around unlike Amsterdam for Schiphol. Regards Io Herodotus (overleg) 23 sep 2015 17:54 (CEST)

Hi Io, for such a thing, I always first look around in Commons, but I couldn't find such a map there. But there are more recent maps, like here.

Concerning the possibility of an airport, I would say that's as controversial as the Markerwaard itself was. But I vaguely remember it has been discussed. More recently, eyes have turned to an extension of Lelystad Airport as an alternative to relieve Schiphol. Apdency (overleg) 23 sep 2015 19:00 (CEST)

Thank you very much. I love maps. On the old maps the size is much larger than on the recent one.Io Herodotus (overleg) 23 sep 2015 20:28 (CEST)

My guess is that over the years, more realistic views slipped in. (Talking about that, ever heard of Plan Bakker-Schut? Oh yes, in many respects it's something very different, but you might be interested.)

By the way, I'm also a map freak. Apdency (overleg) 23 sep 2015 20:39 (CEST)

Wao, that project is scaring, supposing authorities of that time would have realized it that would have meant another war thirty years later.

There is something I can't understand using "google translate". What work was done in 1941 described as the first one for the markerwaard ?Io Herodotus (overleg) 23 sep 2015 21:15 (CEST)

What the Dutch article says about it: "In 1941, work had already begun for the first dike of the future Markerwaard: the still present piece of dike from Marken to the North reminds of this." This piece is meant. Apdency (overleg) 23 sep 2015 21:37 (CEST)

Thank you I changed the article accordingly. I'd love to show different maps of the project. Io Herodotus (overleg) 24 sep 2015 09:49 (CEST)

Ransdorp bridges

Hello.
It seems there are two bridges in Ransdorp. I don't know which is which.
I have never found any map with the numbers or the names of the bridges in Amsterdam.
"Ransdorp bridge" sounds English to me is this the correct name? Regards.
--Io Herodotus (overleg) 09:44, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

• Hallo Io Herodotus, thank you for your reaction. There are three issues here.

Because of the name of the category was in singular ("bridge") and the bridges looked similar and i could identify bridge 343 on one picture, I assumed that all photo's were showing this one bridge. Now i see that that are at least two, as you say, in the images in this category. But there are many more in Ransdorp.

"Ransdorp bridge" is certainly not dutch, but could be used as a description in English, but since there are several bridges it should be in plural: Ransdorp bridges or better "Bridges in Ransdorp" (or "Bridges of Ransdorp"). In Dutch that should be "bruggen in Ransdorp".

Some sources on-line about the bridges and their numbers:

• All official bridge numbers and allmost all official names can be found on "Amsterdam Op de kaart", opdekaart.amsterdam.nl, an official map of the municipality (Gemeente Amsterdam). Zoom-in for Ransdorp: < http://www.opdekaart.amsterdam.nl/?zoom=5&lat=489554&lon=128255&view=map_and_results >. Bridge-numbers are visible after further zooming in.
• bruggenvanamsterdam.nl (Homepage Amsterdamse bruggen) is a (private) website with "all" bridges, there is a list, a description page of every bridge with photo and even a map at < http://www.bruggenvanamsterdam.nl/kaart.htm > with many of the bridges.
• For the bridges in Ransdorp there is a PDF on the site of the villages community council (Centrale Dorpenraad Landelijk Noord), with 9 bridges with photo, including 5 drawbridges. See also: http://www.centraledorpenraad.nl/wp/wp-content/uploads/Officiële-bruggen-en-bruggen-zonder-naam-in-Landelijk-Noord.pdf

Yours , Paul ( --Paulbe (overleg) 12:33, 26 April 2017 (UTC) ).

trintelzand

Hello.

I'm trying to translate Trintelzand into French, but I'm not sure where the limit is between the Marker Wadden and Trintezand. The Marker Wadden article talks about "new islands in 2020-2021", are they talking about Trintelzand ?

Are there two different projets ? I think "Nog twee eilanden extra" should be updated.

Best regards.

- Io Herodotus (overleg) 4 dec 2022 15:29 (CET)

Thank you for contacting me. I will answer later. -- Tevergeefs (overleg) 5 dec 2022 14:56 (CET)

Trintelzand is not a part of the Marker Wadden, but it belongs to more or less the same environment, located in the Markermeer, lying at some distance from the former, more in the direction towards the harbour of Enkhuizen. It is also made just at the southern side of the Houtribdijk, but specifically broadening that one, not being an island, as the Marker Wadden do. It is meant both as a natural area and as a protection of the dike.

The two new islands indeed do form an extra addition to the small archipelago of the Marker Wadden. These ones simply are an extension of it, whereas the Trintelzand is a complementary project.-- Tevergeefs (overleg) 5 dec 2022 20:39 (CET)

Naviduct dijkeiland

Hello.

I have created Naviduct dijkeiland, because I think there is a need for that. However I don't know the name of this island. The article may be deleted soon. May I ask you, if you can and if you think it's worth it, to improve it. It's a machine translation and it probably has a lot of syntaxe errors. The name of the island in particular, probably needs to be changed.

Regards. Io Herodotus (overleg) 10 dec 2022 17:43 (CET)

Tank you for your work. The article Marker Wadden talks about new islands in the future tense, in 2021, (Bijwerken was added). I thought for a while, it was referring to trintelzand, hence my first question.

Best regards.

Gebruiker:Io Herodotus 15 dec 2022 19:07 (CET)

It certainly was worthwile. My pleasure. --Tevergeefs 19 dec 2022 17:43 (CET)

I'm really disappointed and I don't understand the stubbornness or narrow-mindedness of some people. Io Herodotus (overleg) 3 jan 2023 11:42 (CET)

See Marker Wadden, Nationaal Park Nieuw Land, and Naviduct Krabbersgat, they all have been enlarged and updated now. Hoornsche Gat is new. A new category has been added: Categorie: Markermeer. --Tevergeefs 3 jan 2023 15:59 (CET)

Nominatie Naviduct dijkeiland

L.S.,
Uw artikel Naviduct dijkeiland heb ik ter beoordeling voorgelegd aan de gemeenschap. ZIe op Wikipedia:Te beoordelen pagina's/Toegevoegd 20221214 waar u ook commentaar kunt leveren.

• Zie ook Wikipedia:Te beoordelen.

JoostB (overleg) 14 dec 2022 10:50 (CET)

Naviduct dijkeiland

• (overleg | geschiedenis | links | logboekenNaviduct dijkeiland)

WIU: slecht Nederlands, ik vermoed een vertaling en NE: inhoud van dit lemma kan worden toegevoegd aan Naviduct Krabbersgat. JoostB (overleg) 14 dec 2022 10:22 (CET)

I'm sorry for not speaking Dutch.

For me, this island needs a separate article. It belongs to a national park, it certainly deserves more information. What species live there. Can it be visited etc. It is described as a prototype for the other projects. What did it bring ?

The naviduct is something else, for instance it doesn't belong to the parc.

- Io Herodotus 14 dec 2022 11:10 (CET)

I don't want to sound rude, but if you don't speak Dutch, it's not recommended to write articles here. Mondo (overleg) 14 dec 2022 12:28 (CET)

Fortunately, more and more people are interested in ecology. What the Dutch are doing in this regard is great and should be described in this wiki. Please understand that I do not pretend to write articles by myself, I just try to fill a gap and hope that specialists will improve and complete what I dared to start. Io Herodotus 14 dec 2022 22:30 (CET)

I agree that the subject is important enough to be dealt with on Wikipedia. As I understand, however, this land reclamation project is so new that it has not even a name of its own. Therefore, for the moment it can only be placed as a paragraph within the article Naviduct Krabbersgat.

-- Tevergeefs (overleg) 15 dec 2022 00:25 (CET)

In addition to this, I have just suggested a provisional renaming of the lemma as to Natuurgebied bij het Naviduct (voorlopige naam) (Naviduct natural area). With this adaptation maintaining the actual stub as a lemma of its own seems defendable.

--Tevergeefs (overleg) 15 dec 2022 13:39 (CET)

An adequate and rather simple solution would be to choose a name referring to the adjacent topographical location. In this case there is a possibility to connect the new natural area with the name Hoornsche Gat, which exists already for this part of the Markermeer near Enkhuizen. I would propose to use Natuurgebied Hoornsche Gat instead of the provisionary title used thus far. This would define exactly its historic and actual topographic location.

--Tevergeefs (overleg) 15 dec 2022 19:20 (CET)

---

 Conclusie afhandelend moderator: het eerste probleem is nog steeds de naamgeving: een onderwerp dat geen naam heeft, is niet heel handig voor in een encyclopedie. Het lijkt me ook lastig om dan op zoek te gaan naar bronnen, want zonder een al-dan-niet-officiële naam is het moeilijk zoeken. Dat zie je dan ook terug in de bronnen. Om een bewering als 'nieuwe flora en fauna wordt gestimuleerd' te onderbouwen, verwijst men naar een site waar particulieren een waarneming kunnen melden. Dat heeft toch wel iets weg van WP:GOO. En referenties 4 t/m 6 gaan over historische bewoordingen en de historie van het gebied, maar gaan dus niet over het natuurgebied zelf. Dan blijven nog over de planbeschrijvingen van de overheid en een ontwerpbureau voor het toekomstig te realiseren natuurgebied. Die beschrijven alleen de plannen, en dus niet de uiteindelijke realisatie. Uiteindelijk is het gebied kennelijk onderdeel van Nationaal Park Nieuw Land, dus een vermelding aldaar lijkt me meer dan voldoende. Dat lemma biedt nog voldoende ruimte om iets over deze natuurlocatie te vertellen. Voor een eigen lemma is het nog te vroeg. Artikel verwijderd. Thieu1972 (overleg) 28 dec 2022 11:12 (CET)