Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:Woerden

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Woerden is indeed on the railtrack to Leiden, but this railtrack goes to Utrecht as well. So Woerden is only one of the stations, and not the last station. Woerden is also on the railtrack Rotterdam-Gouda-Breukelen-Amsterdam, and Rotterdam/Denhaag-Gouda-Utrecht.

I know, this is a start, additional templates need to be added.--Patrick 01:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trout in Woerden?

[edit]

The river in Woerden is not known for trout. Never heard of this infamous trout fishing event either... Don't believe it so! 57.67.146.66 14:06, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erich von Braunschweig

[edit]

Does anyone here have access to
Plomp, Nico (1972). Woerden 600 jaar stad. Woerden: Stichting Stichts-Hollandse Bijdragen etc. pp. 100–103. ISSN 0929-9718. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
The present version of the article states the following ... the Lutheran duke Erik van Brunswijk, who was Lord of Woerden around 1570, tolerated the Lutheran confession in the city. The problem with that is that Erich von Braunschweig converted from Lutheranism to Catholicism, and a hardliner too; see de:Erich II. (Calenberg-Göttingen). Plomp talks about Braunschweig's brutal suppression of the Lutheran Reformation in Woerden in September 1566, see pp 100-103. This is al I know about this sad episode, and if someone can complete/correct the story I would appreciate it. JdH 21:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Diver diverted?

[edit]

I don't think that the river was diverted in 1960. They closed it, making it a street, the water could already go around, as the so called singel was there before as part of the city defense. It's true that the original flow of the river was stopped, but it was not really diverted, as the alternative route already existed. Edoderoo (talk) 18:55, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History

[edit]

What is included in this section is very comprehensive, but stops very abruptly in 1567, with one sentence seemingly tagged on as an afterthought vaguely mentioning occupations up to 1813...and then nothing. Has nothing worth writing about happened in the town in the past 200 years? Was it a cocoon of peace and refuge during WW2 for example? Was it bypassed by the industrial revolution? Not knocking what is there, but more modern history is needed. Draggleduck (talk) 03:35, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]