12 February 2008

• 22:5422:54, 12 February 2008 diff hist +8‎ Gueuze ‎ →‎References
• 14:4614:46, 12 February 2008 diff hist +44‎ Francization of Brussels ‎No edit summary
• 14:4214:42, 12 February 2008 diff hist +59‎ Francization of Brussels ‎No edit summary
• 14:4114:41, 12 February 2008 diff hist 0‎ Francization of Brussels ‎ period
• 14:3514:35, 12 February 2008 diff hist −143‎ Francization of Brussels ‎ No, this will no do. It's been made clear why Dutch is the preferred term, and there haven't been any counter arguments. Other inaccuracies correct too.
• 11:1611:16, 12 February 2008 diff hist 0‎ Talk:Francization of Brussels ‎ sorry, one more
• 11:1511:15, 12 February 2008 diff hist 0‎ Talk:Francization of Brussels ‎ typo
• 11:0811:08, 12 February 2008 diff hist +708‎ Talk:Francization of Brussels ‎ →‎Dutch or Brabantian
• 10:5110:51, 12 February 2008 diff hist +244‎ Talk:Francization of Brussels ‎No edit summary
• 07:0107:01, 12 February 2008 diff hist −71‎ Francization of Brussels ‎ no, not clarified at all. "Dutch" is a perfectly valid term in this context
• 04:3504:35, 12 February 2008 diff hist +2,247‎ Talk:Francization of Brussels ‎ →‎Dutch or Brabantian

11 February 2008

• 19:4619:46, 11 February 2008 diff hist −123‎ Francization of Brussels ‎ rv

10 February 2008

• 20:5520:55, 10 February 2008 diff hist −123‎ Francization of Brussels ‎ "Not Dutch itself?" Who are you, as a French speaker, to decide what's Dutch and what isn't. This article is about the language shift from Dutch—in whatever dialect or standardized form—to French.
• 12:5112:51, 10 February 2008 diff hist −123‎ Francization of Brussels ‎ rv: this is not about local dialects vs standard language, this is about Dutch vs French.