Talk:Graaff-Reinet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

Former countries

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country

South Africa: Municipalities Mid‑importance

	South Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa 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.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the municipalities task force.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Chris Roper (19 February 2026). "'Tis but thy name that is my enemy". Financial Mail. Retrieved 25 February 2026. Article extensively discusses the history section of the town's Wikipedia page.

On 8 February 2026, it was proposed that this article be moved to Robert Sobukwe Town. The result of the discussion was not moved.

National Monuments

Graaff-Reinet has the highest number of national monuments in any city or town in South Africa: http://www.places.co.za/html/graaff_reinet.html BlandBaroque (talk) 11:13, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

References

Claims such as:

Graaff-Reinet is home to more national monuments than any other town or city in South Africa.

should definitely be cited. Far better not to make such claims at all, but rather to list the monuments. --NJR_ZA (talk) 05:27, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Graaff-Reinet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140904115351/http://nggrootkerk.co.za/geskiedenis.html to http://www.nggrootkerk.co.za/geskiedenis.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://196.35.231.29/sahra/HeritageSitesDetail.aspx?id=21502
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.national.archsrch.gov.za/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:17, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

"fourth oldest town in South Africa"

We're told that Graaff-Reinet comes just after Swellendam, which means that Swellendam was the third oldest. But if we click on the link to Swellendam, we're told that that it's the eighth oldest. Which of these is true? Given Swellendam's much greater proximity to the Cape (from which the colonisation of South Africa proceeded), and other things I've read about the development of the country, I'd expect the former. Perhaps '3' was misread as '8'?213.127.210.95 (talk) 20:00, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

The sources in both article are now working, so it's not clear. Greenman (talk) 17:14, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Found a ref clarifying that it is 4th, so have added that. Greenman (talk) 17:19, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

1st, Cape Town in 1652, 2nd is Stellenbosch in 1679, 3rd is Paarl in 1687 and 4th is Swellendam in 1745 - Thus Graaf Reinette is the 5th oldest town, not 3rd or 4th

Swellendam is NOT the 3rd oldest town

Why is there this historical Lunacy change every now and again to change Swellendam to 3rd oldest town in South Africa and then Graaf - Reinette???

It is the 5 TH , after Cape Town, Stellenbosch and then Paarl and THEN SWELLENDAM.

1st, Cape Town in 1652, 2nd is Stellenbosch in 1679, 3rd is Paarl in 1687 and 4th is Swellendam in 1745 - Thus Graaf Reinette is the 5th oldest town, not 3rd or 4th

Stop changing this !!!!!!!!!185.69.145.92 (talk) 22:21, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Oldest town in South Africa

I see we have mentioned here that Graaff-Reinet is the fourth oldest town in South Africa while the Swellendam article says that Swellendam is the third oldest and the Stellenbosch article says that Stellenbosch is the second oldest.

So, in this case, why do we need Simon's Town and Paarl mentioned in the introduction, in-between Stellenbosch and Swellendam? Is there a particular reason they were mentioned there? I think it is best to just remove the mention of them, as I have failed to see the point. GeographicAccountant (talk) 01:01, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

These have always been contested claims. The sourcing mentions Cape Town first, then Stellenbosch (1679), Swellendam (1746), Graaf-Reinet (1786). It also mentions that in addition to these four administrative towns, "the town of Simonstown was established in 1680 as a harbour and naval station", and then one of the comments mentions Paarl being established in 1687, although from that article, it appears only to refer to the first granting of farmland titles. I suggest any rewording includes these ambiguities. Greenman (talk) 06:28, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Requested move 8 February 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 01:20, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Graaff-Reinet → Robert Sobukwe TownRobert Sobukwe Town – Officially renamed in a South African government gazette published on 06 February 2026. ~2026-86463-2 (talk) 02:55, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Oppose. This change only just became official, and sourcing still overwhelmingly uses the old name. It's far too soon for the new name to replace the old as WP:COMMONAME. Greenman (talk) 09:55, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

@Greenman agree. see Somerset East as an example. although officially now KwaNojoli, colloquially it remains Somerset East. ~2025-42571-61 (talk) 17:52, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Oppose - For the reason Greenman has stated above. GeographicAccountant (talk) 13:21, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Supports - The name was officially changed by the South African government, with the change published in the Government Gazette on 06 February 2026. As the new name is now legally in force, the article should be moved accordingly. ~2026-87705-3 (talk) 17:43, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Maintaining an outdated article title while all major navigation and service platforms (local & international) use the official name creates a mismatch between Wikipedia and the lived experience of users, undermining Wikipedia’s role as a reference point. ~2026-87705-3 (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Sorry to say but please understand the policies of this website. Take a look at WP:Recentism and Wikipedia:CommonName in order to understand why we say that it is too soon for this to happen. It needs to be the "common name" (NOT "official name") in order to be the article's title. The title will change when it does become the "common name". GeographicAccountant (talk) 18:10, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Oppose - violates WP:COMMONAME policy. Oscar J Owen (talk) 15:50, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Oppose As per WP:COMMONNAME. Far too early to suggest the public will adopt it, especially since there appears to have been local opposition to any change. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 08:23, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Oppose per all above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:08, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Oppose. As per previous mentions of WP:COMMONNAME, and if current pushback is anything to go by the possibility of the official name change being reverted is still very much possible. Ananinunenon (talk) 08:49, 13 February 2026 (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.

Related Articles