Talk:Aachen

French pronounciation

I am somehow in doubt whether "EKS lah-shah-PEL" is really the correct French pronounciation for Aix-la-Chapelle. After all, it's not, e. g. "bore-DOKES" for Bordeaux, but "bore-DOUGH"? - Jk 02:10 Mar 21, 2003 (UTC)

Yes, but it is. – Torsten Bronger 07:26, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Who said that French pronounciation follows any logic? :)-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.120.165.34 (talk) 16:02, 24 November 2003 (UTC)

Pronounciation

Actually, the pronounciation hint is wrong. It's pronouced "Ey", not "Eks"

BSL: Note too that the pronunciation of Aix-en-Provence and Aix-les-Bains is "Eks", not "Ey". For reference, see http://www.ldsmissions.net/fpm/fpg.html 71.29.208.156 00:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I´m sorry to disagree but the pronounciation is "Eks". I live in Aachen and I know, folks. --Ofconstanze 22:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course it is pronounced "eks". "Aix" derives from the old french word "Aigues" which comes in turn from the latin "Aquis", so the normal rules of french pronunciation do not apply. The article however appears quite contradictory for severel reasons. First, it is a fact that Aachen sports several Roman excavation sites -especially bathhouses- so there must have been a substantial settlement in Roman times. The article denies this. The palace of Charlemagne does not exist anymore because the city hall building has been built on top of it. Since this happened in the 12th century both cathedral and city hall are Unesco cultural heritage. For this reason the city hall belongs to the most important sights in Aachen, but is hardly mentioned in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.137.7.110 (talk) 14:54, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation

The line above is wrong. (Incidentally, the writer has spelled "pronunciation" wrongly, according to the Oxford Dictionary-maybe he or she is an American!)

I am also a French speaker and I have never heard any French speaking person say "Ey" for Aix. They always say "Eks". As the previous writer stated, there is no logic in it- it is just normal practice. There is not much logic in English either. Take "cough" and "bough" as an example.-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.29.164.224 (talk) 00:50, 8 January 2005 (UTC)

Template:Infobox German Location

Please introduce the Infobox German Location with image. It provides a coherent look among German cities. Lear 21 23:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Redirect from Bad Aachen?

Would a redirect from Bad Aachen be appropriate? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Quale (talk • contribs).

Why not? The "Bad" is part of the official name of the city, though it's usually not used. andy 16:04, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Layout

I noticed that the picture labeled "Aachen cathedral" is covering some of the text above it. Just wondering if someone more tech-savvy could fix that. Thanks. 141.133.11.143 15:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Name of Aachen

Disregarding the pronunciation Aix is quite often left out in France. Before I learnt that in railway signs it was almost always named La Capelle I had troubble since on many trains between Paris and Hamburg you have to change in Aachen. According to my sister living in France the reason is thet there are many Aix in France so they shorten it to the significant part. AND should that not be entered in the table of maning in different languages?Seniorsag 14:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Spelling

It is claimed that the Romanian name for the city is Ahăn. I find this dubious at best, having always encountered it as Aachen in Romanian sources. In fact, few cities in countries with Latin alphabets have different spellings in Romanian, e.g., London → Londra, Moskow → Moscova, Budapest → Budapesta, etc (mostly capitals). In general, the original spelling in kept. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajorza (talk • contribs) 21:16, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

bad pic from the RWTH main building

The picture shows just a part of the building and the "architec building" in the background. This one is better: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Aachen_RWTH_Hauptgebaeude.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.137.16.249 (talk) 17:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Polish

Who cares about how the city is called in polish. It has nothing to do with poland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.221.113.142 (talk) 13:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Photo of medieval houses?

I'm skeptical about the "Middle Age-style architecture" that we mention in the caption to the photo at the start of the History section. The houses in the photo don't look distinctively medieval to me--I'd have guessed they date from around the 18th century, or maybe a few decades earlier or later. 65.213.77.129 (talk) 20:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Population

This site needs to have the currant population somewhere-Chris141496 (talk) 23:57, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Names in languages

The section on names in other languages (which was helpful, as Aachen is known by rather divergent names) has been removed, but there is still a link to it in the first para. Kraamlep (talk) 11:25, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

It was Pepin the Short, not Pippin the Younger, and Granus was a Roman, not a Celtic deity, apparently

Charlemagne's father was Pepin the Short, also known as Pepin III ("Charlemagne", by Derek Wilson, pg. 8 et alia, Doubleday Press, 2006), not "Pippin the Younger".

The French Wikipedia page says that Granus was a Roman who founded Aix-la-Chapelle around the year 124, during the time of the emperor Hadrian, rather than a Celtic deity as mentioned here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.127.120.151 (talk) 00:42, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Aachen vs Aix-la-Chapelle

Aix-la-Chapelle really is an archaic English term for the city much like Brunswick for Braunschweig or Leipsic for Leipzig. No modern English speaker or source that I can think of would use this name. Naturally this older name should be mentioned in the article but it should not be over the city box as if it were an official name. Compare with the Braunsweig or Leipzig article. Burghardts (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

It would not be used for the current city, but it might be used in historical narratives. Certainly it is used in certain set phrases (the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle and the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle are never called the "Treaty of Aachen" or the "Congress of Aachen.") Leipsic is simply an obsolete name that would never be used in any modern account, historical or not. Brunswick might very well be used. john k (talk) 03:55, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

The term Aix-la-Chapelle is even used on traffic signs in nearby Belgium. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 10:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Note that footnote 7 is labeled "Pepin le Bref", (Pepin the Short), but the link leads to no information at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.127.120.220 (talk) 19:04, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Can anybody pls explain the origin of this french "Aix-la-Chapelle" ? The "King of the Sun" couldn't pronounce Aachen and so they referred to it as that place where something with a "Chapelle et une axe" ? Thx.--SvenAERTS (talk) 02:49, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Aix is the french version of Aachen (or rather Aachen is the german version of Aix). Since the franch have many Aix they add a specification like Hay "on Wye". The La Chapelle is since there is a famous medievil (should be medeval i think) church there, ogrginaly a chapel. Seniorsag (talk) 13:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

//////// No, the spelling: "Aachen" is wrest from the older Latin spelling, whilst the French is a modern imperialistic Frenchification from the older German. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.65.142.56 (talk) 05:07, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

As an older, but still modern, English speaker, I disagree with the top of this topic. I've been using Aix-la-Chapelle as the name of this city ever since going there in 1958. Similarly, I would use Brunswick, Munich, and Cologne, though I draw the line at Mayence, which I've never seen in English texts. C. Cerf (talk) 18:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

You don’t say ‘Aix-la-Chapelle’ and you know it. Stop lying.

Bytheway, many say “Koln” over “Cologne”. 2A00:23C7:2B13:9001:8967:F793:3BE5:FD30 (talk) 20:44, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Innovation Ranking: add International place

This information "For innovation, Aachen is currently ranked 8th among cities in Germany." could be put into perspective: "Internationally, Aachen ranks 42th place, right between Oslo and Basel.". Can't do it - protected. eMPee584 (talk) 14:14, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

sulpher springs historical significance

Hello, I was going through my old encyclopedia americana from 1959 and noticed that it said, "Aachen owes its chief celebrity to its sulpher springs, which mad the city a noted spa cince the 1st century A.D. (when the Romans frequented it), and, above all, to its many medieval associations and historic edifaces. Aachen was the favorite residence of Charlemagne, king of the Franks (768-814) and emperor of the West (800-814), who was born and died there and who made it the capital of his dominions north of the Alps. During the middle ages its status as a free city of the Holy Roman empire exempted its citizens from both feudal service and from imperial taxation. Aachen served as the coronation city for 37 German emperors from 814 to 1531 and preserved the imperial insigniauntil their transfer to Vienna, Austria, in 1795."

Also, "During World War II most of Aachen's meieval bnuildings were damaged or destroyed by Allied aerial and artillery bombardment before the American First Army, moving with massed firepower from street to street, took by storm on Oct. 20, 1944, this first German city to fall to the Allies and reduced to rubble much of what little had escped devestation. While the cathedral, which had been founded in 796 by Charlemagne and had been rebuilt in 983 by Emperor Otto III and had been restored with Gothic additions in the 14th and 15th centuries, recieved relatively small harm and saved most of its sacred relics (as well as Charlemagnes tomb), yet either severe damage or total destruction befell the historical museum, the art museum, the city hall, which was built in the 14th century on the site of Charlemagne's palace, and many medieval churches, such as St. Foillan's (12th Century), St. Nicholas' (14th century), and st. Paul's (15th century). Total damage was about 85 per cent."

I'm not good at writing articles or adding new information to articles, but I just thought I would write all this down it's a direct quote from 1959 Edition of Encyclopedia Americana volume 1 on page 2. Thanks! Thepoodlechef (talk) 18:10, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Introduction

"Aachen was a favoured residence of Mickey Mouse, who had pleasure in meeting three year old kids. later the place of coronation..."

This is in the introduction; though, I'm fairly positive it shouldn't be. Someone more knowledgeable than I should edit this...

24.254.221.212 (talk) 00:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for spotting this. This was added by a vandal on 2013-04-17 12:15:32‎, but already fixed 10 seconds later. Unless you explicitly requested to view that old revision in the edit history, you must somehow be using a cached version of the article. Please update your browser cache (F5) to make sure you are viewing the current version of the article. In general, if you spot similar problems, you are invited to fix them yourself. It's easy, you don't need to be afraid of it. :-) Greetings, --Matthiaspaul (talk) 10:23, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

City Districts

Hello! I have nearly completed my translation of the seven administrative districts of Aachen, and I plan on incorporating some of that information into the Aachen article. The articles are as follows:

Brand (Aachen)

Laurensberg

Haaren (Aachen)

Eilendorf (Aachen)

Richterich

Aachen-Mitte

With the Kornelimünster/Walheim article soon to be up. The Kornelimünster/Walheim and Aachen-Mitte articles need work because they were short in the German wikipedia, but each linked to a bunch of other articles that haven't been translated yet. That's a work in progress, of course. In any case, I'd like to add these to the main Aachen page, as well as a few other things that come up as I translate (like Ponttor, Elisenbrunnen, etc). This is just a heads up for anyone who is watching this page.

This might also be relevant to the discussion: Template_talk:Cities_and_towns_in_Aachen_(district) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljpernic (talk • contribs) 17:51, 14 September 2013 (UTC) Edit: Forgot to sign it. Ljpernic (talk) 19:33, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Adding sections

Hello all! I am adding new sections to the article about Aachen that have been translated from the German article. In particular, I am adding a panorama, a section on names in the different languages, the local dialect, surrounding communities, boroughs/districts, population, and geology. I have also rewritten the section on climate, and given it its own section. these are all directly translated from the German, and I am working on adding sources as well.

I have also rewritten the lede (which can be found at User:Ljpernic/sandbox2, but I will not add that yet. It covers parts mentioned in the German article but not yet mentioned in the English one. I wanted to let people discuss it first. My goal is to get the article to qualify as a "good article". Ljpernic (talk) 15:59, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

"Klenkes"

From a Google auto-translation of the German Wikipedia article (de:Klenkes): "The Klenkes is a distinctive signs of greeting each other in Aachen." and it goes on about the city. I think we should include this little tidbit of information in this article, if not a separate stand-alone article, but unsure where to put it, plus it needs a better translation. See also commons:Category:Klenkes. -- œ^™ 03:21, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Definitely a good idea to include it. 78.35.252.248 (talk) 05:48, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Timeline of Aachen

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content! Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 08:59, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

'Aachen' is not a translation from French

So I have got rid of the following disinformation: "Aachen’s name in French and the loan translation in German evolved in parallel"

Anyway, why not also set out a list showing how "Charlemagne" is a French translation from the original German, no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.65.142.56 (talk) 04:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Btw: "Charlemagne" is French; Latin is Carolus Magnus (Charles the Great); German is Karl der Grosse (Charles the Great).C. Cerf (talk) 18:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Carl the Great hence Carolingians. 2A00:23C7:2B13:9001:8967:F793:3BE5:FD30 (talk) 20:53, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

EngvarB

As witnessed over the last two days, an anonymous user of varying IP address tried to express themselves, saying that there is an issue with the English language variation beginning with this edit by Future Perfect at Sunrise, which changed most words in the article to American English. However, as the anonymous user rightfoully states, the city is affiliated with British English way more than with American English. On top, there was no Engvar template ({{Use American English}} / {{Use British English}}) given on the article to justify the edit of changing it forcedly. I have since replaced most content with British English and added the according template to the article. What hinders this article from enhance is Zzuuzz, Favonian, Lectonar and RickinBaltimore constantly reverting the anonymous user instead of reading. Even if written in a hard langauge, it is easily visible that it is not spam or trolling. If there is something to discuss, wether American English goes over British English from your POV, seek for consensus here. Thanks, Lordtobi (✉) 17:59, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

From what I can tell, the IP is banned user Vote (X) for Change, which is why their contributions are being reverted. clpo13_(talk) 18:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Could you elaborate on why "the city is affiliated with British English way more than with American English"? English is not an official language of that region. Regarding the reverts by myself and others, they are in compliance with Wikipedia's policy regarding bans, specifically WP:BMB. The user in question (Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Vote (X) for Change) is one of our more persistent trolls and should be reverted on sight. Favonian (talk) 18:05, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

(ec) I don't really care whether it's American or British – either way, the previous versions were inconsistent, so if you have now cleaned it up in favour of one variant, that's fine with me. As a matter of principle, I'd disagree with the argument that continental European geography articles are ipso facto "affiliated" with British English. The criterion (MOS:TIES) of "strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation" has a far higher threshold than that – it would apply to locations in Britain and the like. So, in terms of policy, the operational rule is still that we should "use the variety found in the first post-stub revision that introduced an identifiable variety". But don't worry, I certainly have better things to do than digging through the early article history to see whether an "ize" or an "ise" was there first. – As for the reversions, the main reason was that the anon IP was a particularly obnoxious banned user and serial sockpuppeter, who should be reverted anywhere no matter what he does. I have no objections against you making a choice of variety here, but I very much object to letting that banned user get away with making that choice for us. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Per the above, the EngVar issue is a red herring. If someone who isn't Vote (X) for Change wants to homogenize the article to one particular version of English (if it isn't in one already. I haven't looked that closely), that would be fine, and has nothing to do with why these edits were reverted. Also, don't edit war, and don't violate WP:ENGVAR. But the reverts in this one case have nothing to do with the version of English which either is or should be used in this article. It has to do with Vote (X) for Change being their usual self and refusing to go away. --Jayron32 18:09, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Wrapping this up, the article is still not in the best possible shape when it comes to English variations. I used the EngvarB script by Ohconfucius, which, however, does not seem to get everything. As we are 5 editors seemingly prepared, I think we should get this finalisation done easily, best on a per-section basis. It depends, though, on which veriation you prefer. I now have British put since public and official texts are always written in it, as well as it being the standard curriculum for North Rhine-Westfalia. If you disagree, we can get a consensus on that. Lordtobi (✉) 18:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• Despite the high number of reverts on given banned user, I'd appreciate your input into the article. What's worth protecting from vandalism when improvment itself is not there? Lordtobi (✉) 17:57, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Aachen Germany Domschatz Cross-of-Lothair-01.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:06, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 8 February 2020

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Aachen → Aix-la-Chapelle – This is the more traditional name used in English, and although "Aachen" has caught on to some extent today, there are reasons to prefer "Aix-la-Chapelle" 1. It's easier for English speakers to pronounce. "KH" is not a sound used in English, and Aachen is pronounced "AH-khən", whereas "Aix-la-Chapelle" doesn't include any foreign/difficult sounds. (It is pronounced EX LAH shə-PELL) 2. It is vastly more common in historical contexts, and Aix-la-Chapelle is more relevant in the context of medieval history than it is today. 3. "Aix-la-Chapelle" ties the city's name to its biggest tourist attraction - the Palatine Chapel 4. Generally, we shouldn't deviate from a nomenclature tradition unless it makes things more difficult to understand PopesTouch (talk) 10:12, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. I've never in my life heard any English speaker say "Aix-la-Chapelle", and according to ngrams it stopped being the most common usage in English books in around 1940. It's not even as if it's an English word, it's borrowed from the French, and while some such terms have prevailed, such as Cologne, this city is overwhelmingly just called Aachen these days.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:36, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Ngrams is bad with compount names, compare "Aix" to "Aachen" PopesTouch (talk) 11:43, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

    Well, that could also refer to Aix-les-Bains or Aix-en-Provence, and even then your ngram only shows it neck-and-neck with Aachen. If any more evidence is needed that Aachen is far-and-away the common name, see also: Britannica, UNESCO, the BBC, Civitas, the city's own English tourism website, and also modern history books such as [1] (which refers to it primarily as Aachen, while also acknowledging the alternative name).  — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose, per Merriam-Webster, American Heritage, and Oxford. Colin Gerhard (talk) 12:41, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose, better to follow modern usage in the article title. —Kusma (t·c) 12:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per Amakuru. No reason why we should be using a French name for a German city on the English Wikipedia. Ejgreen77 (talk) 03:41, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose and SNOW close total nonsense. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. What utter nonsense. Please Snow close this to avoid that more editors who follow RMs waste their time. --T*U (talk) 11:48, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Who on Earth uses Aix-la-Chapelle? According to Google Trends, the term Aachen is way more commonly used ShiberToast (talk) 18:48, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Innovation (outdated reference)

We should reconsider the reference to the 2009 study on "innovative cities". While Aachen may have been ranked 8th among cities in Germany back then, it is ranked 17th today, which does seem much less newsworthy to mention. Picking out one particular of the past 20 annual rankings that suits the city marketing most, looks like cherry-picking data to me. >> https://www.innovation-cities.com/index-2019-global-city-rankings/18842/ Alex Gerber (talk) 17:24, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

"Akwizgran" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Akwizgran and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 23#Akwizgran until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 02:44, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

"Cáchy" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Cáchy and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 23#Cáchy until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 02:45, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• North Rhine-Westphalia location map 01.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

History

There is no or little mention to the Battle of Aachen in the article itself despite it being major, first German city Western allies captured and the battle being known as the American Stalingrad. An article already exists for the battle so maybe someone could edit the WW2 history bit a little bit and include a mention of the Battle and add a internal link to it. Thanks very much Supelrand (talk) 20:41, 19 August 2024 (UTC)