Talk:National Redoubt (Belgium)

Military history: Fortifications / World War I / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Fortifications task force
	World War I task force
	World War II task force

Belgium

	Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Consensus was to move. Having said that I think there are still a few issues with the name that may need discussing. Is it 'redoubt' or 'Redoubt'? Also should Antwerp be in the title rather then Belgium? If we retain Belgium in any further discussions, should its disambiguation match what is used for National Redoubt (Switzerland)? Vegaswikian (talk) 18:09, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

National Reduit (Belgium) → National redoubt of Belgium – The term "national reduit" is awkward, especially when the French is the barely dissimilar and perfectly comprehensible réduit national. The term "national redoubt" is both more common and less awkward. Further, it appears that the term for the Belgian fortress is not really a proper noun: most books I can find on Google simply refer to the Belgian national redoubt, or the national redoubt of Boelgium, or the national redoubt in Antwerp, etc. (This article was originally titled Réduit national and was moved without a discussion.) Srnec (talk) 03:21, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Support. Obviously an improvement. The proposed form is still not exactly the common name. The subject is usually given as something like "Fortress of Antwerp" or "ring of fortresses around Antwerp". Perhaps the title can be National Redoubt Antwerp. Kauffner (talk) 08:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support definitely an improvement, plus wikt:réduit also means "reduce" 70.24.244.198 (talk) 03:40, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Move back to "Réduit national" instead, since that's the actual name and the most common name; attested by far more Gbooks hits than Kauffner found for the anglicised version. It's still readable enough and it's more concise. Happy to have a redirect from here, of course. bobrayner (talk) 13:28, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I get 28 (19 deghosted) post-1980 English-language GBook hits for Belgium "Réduit national". Kauffner (talk) 19:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Why is redoubt less awkward than reduit? -- PBS (talk) 18:13, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is actually in dictionaries. Srnec (talk) 21:50, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So is reduit: Oxford English Dictionary "2. A keep or stronghold into which a garrison may retreat if the outworks are taken, thereby prolonging the defence of the place". -- PBS (talk) 20:13, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford English Dictionary redoubt "b. An entrenched stronghold or refuge; = reduit n. 2." -- PBS (talk) 20:29, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The OED online calls this definition of reduit "Now hist." Srnec (talk) 02:23, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what hist short for history signifies. It does not mean obsolete usage which is indicated by a cross at the start of the definition.[1] -- PBS (talk) 15:59, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I get 3 post-1980 English-language Google Book hits for Belgium "National Reduit", 672 (291 deghosted) for Belgium "National Redoubt". Kauffner (talk) 00:19, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Needs a better summary

I came to this article looking for a basic description of the Antwerp redoubt, how many rings of forts, how many forts. Even after spending time studying the article, I didn't feel I could derive a realiable summary, so I had to look elsewhere. DonPMitchell (talk) 23:26, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

distinction between National redoubt of belgium and fortification of Antwerp

The Natioanal redoubt is a cornerstone the belgian defensive strategy from 1890 - 1940 It consisted of following fortifications and defences

- a fortification of Liege(Luik) with a number forts
- a fortification of Namur(Namen) with a number forts
- a fortification at Alden Biesen
- KW line a "canal" to defend against tank incursions
- kempens anti-tank canal
- the coastal defenses as a restreat agaisnt invasion troops

--DerekvG (talk) 15:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this is correct. The "National Redoubt" in the sources I have seen refers to the fortifications of Antwerp only - see e.g. 1. —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:49, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]