Talk:Dutch customs and etiquette

message: I think this article is, at least 90% of it, ridiculous.
Really, is this not just ridiculous? The above statement holds true for anybody. It's human communication. --80.216.238.215 (talk) 20:28, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please don't make changes to this article just to prove a point, see WP:POINT. It's vandalism. justinfr (talk) 21:02, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is ridiculous. Although the article contains some useful bits of information, most of it is either universally applicable or grossly inaccurate. Iblardi (talk) 21:57, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Your blanket statement that "anybody" would consider anything but staring horrendously rude is not only ABSOLUTELY incorrect but incredibly ignorant. Cultures vary quite widely, the farther east in Asia you go, the less likely you are to be received well by staring a hole through someone's head. It's not exactly universally received in North America either, you'll find yourself getting strange reactions especially in business settings if you make unbreaking eye contact. see Eye Contact for more references and less anecdata. edit- Wow, all users voicing that every other culture in existence approves of staring are Dutch. shocking.go slowly (talk) 23:18, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand whether you mean it is ridiculous.... or not . Please elaborate. Arnoutf (talk) 23:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

text: This is indeed one of the most ridiculous articles I have ever come across, but its very existence reflects the almost surreal obsession the Dutch have with their collective self-image. Especially over the past 10 years or so. 78.129.220.45 (talk) 23:03, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ridiculous Article 

message: I've edited the language paragraph which has been edited in the past before. Dutchmen are generally outstandingly well in speaking other languages, and there is no other country in the world which comes close to the Dutch system of education regarding foreign languages. The fact that the majority of French barely speak a word of English, and the English generally don't know a word of French either, while Dutchmen speak English very well and French fairly good as well, and even German reasonably well. As mentioned, both our mother language Dutch, and the foreign language English are obligatory subjects at all levels of high school. French is obligatory in the first 2 years of the lowest level of high school and 3 years at the moderate and high levels of high school education. German is obligatory in the second year of the lowest level of high school, and from the second till the third year at the moderate and high levels of high school education and either French or German(the pupil can choose which one of the two subjects he/she wants to choose)is obligatory in the fourth year too. Latin and Greek are obligatory in the first few years of VWO/Gymnasium, the two highest levels of high school education. Spanish, Italian and sometimes even Chinese can be chosen as subject instead of other subjects as well, and some primary schools are even starting to teach Chinese, and English is being taught in the last few years of primary school for quite some time now. I can say with certainty there is not country in the world with an educational system which teaches so many languages and so well.Psych0-007 (talk) 03:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, Psych0-007. Your English teachers would be quite disappointed. You are not as facile as you think. In the paragraph above, the first sentence is redundant---3 times. It should end at "paragraph." The second use of "edit" and the further use of "in the past before" are completely unnecessary. Your use of "well" in the second sentence is in error. It should be "good". ("Dutchmen speak outstandingly well in other languages" would be acceptable) Also, the third group of 41 words is NOT a sentence. You have omitted the verb, the action word. As it reads, it is merely a collection of phrases. Later sentences also have problems but I believe I have made my point. Normally, I would not call another editor to task regarding their English grammar but you present yourself and your education as the best. Reading the above, some might take exception to that claim.--Buster7 (talk) 04:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language 

message: Almost 2/3 of the Dutch live either in North or South Holland, the region provides for half of the Dutch economy and the Dutch ministry of foreign affairs and board of tourism uses Holland instead of the Netherlands when advertising for the country abroad (http://www.holland.com), except for a handful of provincials, no one finds it insulting to be called a 'Hollander'.
Ummm.... While agree I have never heard of someone being insulted at being called a Hollander, not even half of the dutch live in north & south Holland... http://www.nidi.knaw.nl/nl/atlas/size/tabsize/
Besides you being arrogant, you're also wrong. About 38% of the Dutch population lives in Holland. And being offended is maybe a big word, but it is quite odd to call someone from Friesland, Limburg or Groningen a 'Hollander'.
I live in the east, and while I personally do not take offence if people refer to the entire country as Holland (if they couldn't know) but I know heaps of people who will be seriously hurt if you call them Hollanders. They are definately not. This has mainly to do with the (possibly perceived) arrogance of the "real" Hollanders. Just to be on the safe side just call everything the Netherlands.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.90.42.250 (talk) 18:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holland vs. Netherlands 

message: The Dutch language is extremely hard to pronounce and most Dutch people will perceive a foreigner trying to speak Dutch as someone who's having great difficulties trying to express him or herself.
As far as I can tell we dutch consider it a great effort and do appreciate it a lot if a foreigner tries to speak dutch. Changed the paraghraph accordingly. . . . s k i n 15:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The paragraph does not claim otherwise.Rex (talk) 12:45, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Not for foreigners... - Simeon (talk) 04:01, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Foreigners speaking Dutch

message: The section "The people" describes tendencies as absolutes. It is highly biased. Brammen 13:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Again nearly all your statements can be easily proven wrong and are misplaced. For example, it's not a matter of how long you work, but how hard you work during the time you work. That fact that the average Dutch person works 32 hours doesn't prove anything on them not being hard workers.Rex 20:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bias

message: I've started to write about Dutch driving skills. Might be something, might be not. Well... I'll see if the sentence will survive the next few weeks... :-) SietskeEN 19:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Driving skills 

message: Everything under "heerlijk" is unacceptable, that made me laugh. If I said, "ja het was lekker" then people assume that what I ate was sub standard?
it's kinda how you pronounce it. but restaurants always want feedback if something wasn't great Markthemac 04:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Heeft het gesmaakt

message: Would anyone have a problem if I change the reference in the Humor section about Germans and intelligence to read...."stupid foreigners." Its the same troubling issue as before and my request to change is also the same.--Buster7 (talk) 21:43, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it can be completely omitted since it doesn't add any useful information. I've implemented is as such. Richard 11:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: PS: If you want to critisize Psych0-007 (Your English teachers would be quite disappointed, see above) you should also take more care in your own contributions: in this small section you have missed two apostrophes (it is the Germans, so it should read it's, the same goes for it's the same issue as before, and a question (would anyone...) should be ended with a question mark. Furthermore, change should (in my opinion) not be written in the present tense. Richard 11:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: apostrophes in English seem sometimes fairly random to non native speakers. The same goes with the tense for Dutch speaking people; where using a present tense for the past is perfectly normal. Arnoutf (talk) 11:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Its without an apostrophe is the possessive form of it (like his, hers, yours, ...). In this case it was simply used wrong. The tense is arguable (that's why I said: in my opinion) but it was not used for something in the past but rather for something that might be done in the future. Personally, I would have written 'if I changed' or 'if I would change'. But like said before: that is my opinion. Richard 15:05, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: (apostroph = apostrophe, posessive = possessive) But I understand. Like me, your focus was on editing, not typing. Regarding the question mark, or lack of it...(it's lack?) The New World Secretarial Handbook, page 326, states:"The question mark is not needed at the end of a courteous request that is phrased as a question." Also, my use of "change" is most definitely in the present tense and is correct. It remained in the present tense until someone "changed" the section. When I wrote the sentence, it related to NOW. Your suggestions were just as good. Let's not get tense over tense. Psych0-007 was bragging. I wasn't.--Buster7 (talk) 21:25, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: He was. I just thought your comment was a little too harsh. If you want to correct someone you might as well take the diplomatic path. Which doesn't mean you didn't have a point. Richard 07:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Now its the Germans

message: :The Dutch consider it rude not to identify oneself.
:When introducing themselves, the Dutch shake hands and say their name.
:It is considered impolite to enter a house without being invited to. The Dutch consider it an invasion of privacy.
:When yawning, the mouth should be covered with a flat hand or fist.
Isn't this just laughable?
Do some people really think this applies just to the Dutch, and not pretty much to every polite person living in this world? ROFL.
--Fertuno (talk) 15:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well... yes and no. Shaking hands is common in WESTERN cultures but not in EVERY culture. Also, in some cultures the "front door" is litteraly "open to everyone". So, it doesn't apply to every polite person living in this world. But (as stated in the first paragraph): many general points of European ettiquette apply to the Dutch as well - and many points mentioned in the article could be removed since they go without saying for the majority its readers. Richard 08:54, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I continue to be amused at the amount of Dutch people that are absolutely shocked that the rest of the planet don't share their "values". But of course, if they don't adhere to them, they're not a polite person, aka civilized person. Nice implications there, it just furthers the stereotype of Holland.go slowly (talk) 10:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Geez, Didn't you know that they invented the whole covering the mouth thing when yawning.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.210.35.24 (talk) 00:15, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dutch (?!?) etiquette 

message: There is a link on this page toward a page that existed on my old website, "http://www.geocities.com/stevenedw/dutchcustoms.html." I have moved my site, and that page is now at http://www.stevenroyedwards.com/dutchcustoms.html. I do not want to change the link myself, because I'm concerned about any appearance of conflict-of-interest. If anybody else feels motivated to do so, and feels that the page still merits linkage, I'd appreciate the help. Stevenroyedwards (talk) 18:43, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed the link accordingly - nothing else. Richard 07:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  External link to a page of mine, now moved 

message: this is wrong: The Dutch value privacy and seldom start interactions with strangers.
sit in a dutch train and everybody speaks to you (can we remove that?) Markthemac (talk) 05:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: - it was out of context and contradicted some of the points that followed. Richard 09:17, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong 

message: Why this article exists completely confuses me in an encyclopaedic sense. But what really confuses me is its content, not only is most of it generally assertion, it's nothing remotely useful or of any value. It should probably be deleted as it's not useful and may be deemed offensive.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by NamedRedshirt (talk • contribs) 19:07, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Article's existence

message: I know there's already a discussion about this on the same page, but it is very messy and over three and a half years old. So here's a new one to start out fresh.
For once and for all: Dutch people often make jokes about Belgians revolving around their alleged stupidity. So do the Poles, they joke about the Czechians. Norwegians make fun of Swedes. Etcetera. According to this site (http://www.moppen.nl/?catID=9), which is a large collection of Dutch jokes, about 8 percent of Dutch jokes are about Belgians.
There's no point in discussing whether it's offensive to people. Should we remove the Ku Klux Klan page so we don't offend black people? Should we remove Mein Kampf so we don't offend the Jews? Wikipedia describes, it doesn't prescribe. It is a fact that these jokes are happening, and whether they are offensive or not is an entirely different discussion. The jokes exist, and you can't have an article about Dutch humour without it. --Harmenator (talk) 22:40, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I was not the one objecting to mentioning something in that direction. The whole thing started somewhere around this edit dated 05/29/2008. A few edits later, it resulted in When making fun of other nations, like most nations the Dutch most frequently target their neighbours, which in time was changed into Like most people, the Dutch most frequently target their neighbors when making fun of other nations. This was removed about two and a half months ago, during Epeefleche's quest to reduce uncited content. Richard 08:42, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are not objecting to mentioning something in that direction, then why did you remove my contribution?Harmenator (talk) 21:38, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it was incomplete (the Belgians are not the only neighbors the Dutch have) and the way it was written, it was bound to make history repeat itself. Richard 09:41, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dutch vs Belgians 

message: Now, I realize that I may have some conflict of interest, being Dutch myself, but with the kind of claims this article makes, some references really are necessary. To highlight a couple of gems:
*"Dutch people tend to view themselves as modest, tolerant, independent and self-reliant, although most expats and foreigners experience that this is not often the case as Dutch people tend to distance themselves from people they consider as a foreigner according to research conducted in the expatriate community."
:Okay, so there is research conducted in the expatriate community. Nice. Now how about actually referencing that research? This honestly comes rather close to "according to some people" and similar weasel-words and -phrases. For that matter, a source for the "Dutch people tend to view themselves as..." might be useful as well. Furthermore, "experience that this is not often the case" refers to all four points mentioned before. Since when does people distancing them from people they consider foreigners have anything to do with modesty, independence or self-reliance? Tolerance, yes, but the other three... hardly. 
:(Also, could the sentence have been written more awkward than that? The second part runs on and on and there is some rather strange word-order in the middle as well, even beyond the issues I mentioned) 
*Basic manners in most countries, such as holding a door open for others, apologizing or saying 'thank you', are not part of common Dutch manners. Source, please? (By the way, I agree on the first point from personal experience (it is seen as somewhat stuffy and outdated), but the other two sound more like stereotypes talking. And yes, I know that personal experience/original research does not count as reference, but that goes both ways, for exclusion and inclusion both)
*The Dutch have a strong preference for the non-essential and ostentatious behaviour is to be avoided. Ahem. Is this sentence supposed to mean that the Dutch have a strong preference for the non-essential, or that non-essential and ostentatious behaviour are preferably avoided? Right now, the first half of the sentence reads one way and the other half reads the other. 
*A lot of Dutch humor is often of sexual and racial nature and the Dutch people have a tendency to not understand foreign jokes and only understand Dutch jokes. Okay, this really needs a source. 
I count twelve references. Eight are traffic-related. One has to do with surnames. That leaves all of three sources for the remainder of the article. Also, one of them - the one used for part of the humour section - is used to support statements like "At the end of the 17th century the Dutch lost their sense of humor", while the source rather specifically says that according to one specific historian, this is the case. The other remaining sources (source, really), The UnDutchables, is rather well-known for being part-serious, part-humorous and at some points exaggerated. If I remember correctly from when I read it, which is admittedly a few years ago, the foreword even acknowledges this. That's not to say it can't be used, but to have it as basically the sole reference to hold up 50+% of the article, no. 
I can go on for a while, but I'd rather not. What it boils down to is that in its current state, this page is better off being moved to Unsourced stereotypes and generalizations of Dutch customs and etiquette. And yes, I do intend to work on this article as well and see if I can't whip it into shape some, but with the amount of rewriting this needs and the reverting back-and-forth that went on earlier today, I felt I was better off making a talkpage post first. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 15:16, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of what you address above, is added by two users who I susupect of actually being the same person. His "unless of course you are a biased Dutch person (as usual)" on my talk page strongly hints to prejudice on his side. Not to mention the ambiguity of some of his sentences. Richard 09:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: after looking into things a bit deeper, you're not the only one who suspects such a thing. I have started a sock-puppet investigation here. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 12:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is the NPOV? How about some reliable references on something else than traffic? 

message: Considering that nearly all edits since the 21st were either by a sockmaster and his puppets (see here) or reverts of their edits, I have reverted the article back to the version of the 21st before Robedia's appearance. 
This happens to be the version without "*Traffic on motorways is dense and moderately fast, often above the speed limit http://www.bestwelsnel.nl/", pretty much the only point in the article that editors seemed to be in disagreement over before Robedia's appearance.
I am not necessarily opposed to adding it back in in some form. However, I do believe the wording needs to be more clear on both the point of density (do we have a definition for dense, or at least actual numbers, or a source calling traffic on motorways in the Netherlands dense?) and the point of moderately fast (same as with dense. Both are pretty arbitrary). Furthermore, the site used as reference does not support the claim as a whole. It merely supports that it happens that people drive well above the speed limit (which happens in pretty much any country which both has frequent traffic and speed limits, I'd dare guess) and does nothing to support the use of the word often, which is again rather arbitrary. Because what is often to one person is not often to another, I feel that if we use it here, we ought to source it well, such as a source that outright states "often", "commonly", "frequently" or another synonym. All in all, I feel that the sentence needs better sourcing and perhaps a slight rewrite so that it becomes clear to the reader what is considered dense, moderately fast and often. Now that the disruptive editor is gone, however, I am certain that we can discuss this and reach consensus and/or a compromise. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:21, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: (who is not a puppet of Robedia) did not object to this edit, which addresses all of your concerns voiced above. Richard 09:05, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I know that User:Ad Poppink is not a sockpuppet, that's why I addressed specifically that point as "something to discuss" rather than it falling under the blanket revert for the sockpuppet/master's edits. I agree that it might mean they do not object to it, or they chose not to edit the page so long as that chaos earlier was going on. Figured I was better off putting it on the talkpage when no discussion was needed than not put it there while discussion might still be needed. In any case, thanks for replying. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 16:07, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverted back to version on the 21st due to sockpuppeting; discussion regarding "dense and moderately fast traffic" under Traffic 

message: The part about humor here only talks about Dutch humor up until the 1960s, that's not etiquette, that's history. It gives the impression that the Dutch are still the same as in the 60s, and won't appreciate humor, which is untrue. It is just one of the issues with this short and inconcise article. This is not something worthy of the name encylopedic. ~~Martijn204~~
210.49.196.162 (talk) 01:48, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Humor