Talk:Politics of the Netherlands (terminology)

message: This page was created as decided on Talk:Politics of the Netherlands. C mon 07:44, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

message: There have been several discussions over whether to use the term king or queen when not talking about a specific one. 'Monarch' was one option that was mentioned to avoid the problem. But that doesn't work with a province's commissioner. One can't say 'monarch's commissioner', so a choice has to be made between king's and queen's commissioner. I'm in favour of the former for two reasons. One, the male version of a word is often used for such purposes and two, it'll be just a few years before the monarch will actually be a king, so we might as well anticipate. Neither argument is very strong, but we have to decide on something, so here's my vote. 
Then again, we Limburgers just say 'gouverneur', which pretty much avoids the problem, but I suppose that won't do. :) DirkvdM 20:27, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting argument, but this discussion should (and probably has been) held at Queen's Commissioner the seperate article on the subject. C mon 21:03, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  King / queen / monarch and his/her commissioner 

message: The idea of this list is basically to avoid a lot of stubs (it wasn't proposed like that originally, but that's what it comes down to, right?). But we still need a way to link to the entries. One way is to use the standard format [[Politics of the Netherlands (terminology)#<entry>]]. But that's way too much to type every time. An alternative would be to make a page titled 'polnedterm' or something similar and redirect that to here and then use [[polnedterm#<entry>]]. Assuming that works (I'm not really sure). But it seems to me to make more sense to make a redirect for each term. So we make an 'article' called 'term' and then redirect that to here. That is a bit more work to set up, but much handier in use (and intuitive for those who don't know this page exists) and it rserves the title in case the description goes beyond stub-size and it deserves a separate article ('gedogen' is a likely candidate for that). That would also avoid the risk of double work in case an article already exists (we'll have to check for that, so we might as well make the reirect then) or in case someone comes up with the idea to write an article on it. If there is no article under that title, they might not find out it already existst here. So plenty reasons for that solution, I'd say. 
By the way, I checked 'gedogen' and there is no article under that title, but ther is a redirect from gedoogbeleid to 'Drug policy of the Netherlands'. Of course that will not do because the term is much broader than that. But that's a different issue. Just thought I'd point it out. DirkvdM 20:54, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both options are a lot of work. If you want to spend the structural time making these redirections, that's fine by me. It would also been useful if the pages of these terms might already exist, if we would like to move an entry from this page to a separate page (like Queen's Commissioner and it is not impossble that Staatssecretaris for instance would one day merit it's own separate article. Until then I'll just put in the conjunctural work. C mon 21:03, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it won't be that much work. Half an hour maybe (in the morning when Wikipedia is fast enough). But we do need a method to keep track of for which terms there already is a redirect in case of additions here by people who haven't read or followed this policy. Maybe some marker in the source that is invisible in the rendered text. DirkvdM 19:02, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to link to entries in the list 

message: Under 'lijsttrekker' it says " If the party looses the elections, this person often leaves politics." What is meant here? First of all, what does 'losing the elections' mean? And I've never heard of a lijsttrekker leaving politics altogether as a result of bad election results. DirkvdM 19:27, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Kars Veeling, Eelco Brinkman, Ad Melkert, Thom de Graaf. But you're right the text is rather vague. I'll try to make it more precise. C mon 19:52, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Did they leave politics altogether? I haven't followed their careers, and they have been out of the picture, but I just find it unlikely that someone who has been lijsttrekker and therefore must have been very into politics would leave it completely. Didn't they get some relatively minor job for the party somewhere or something? DirkvdM 07:19, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They left parliament, and therefore 'politics' in a narrow sense. Following the elections (May 2002) Veling resigned his post in May and left parliament in September due to stress. Following the elections (May 1994) Brinkman resigned his post in August and left parliament in April to become head of an employers' organization. Following the elections (January 2003) De Graaf resigned his post in January, unexpectedly he became vice-prime-minister in May. Following the elections (May 2002) Ad Melkert resigned his post in May, and left parliament in october, to enter international governance. C mon 07:48, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsuccessful lijsttrekker leaves politics? 

message: For historic reasons: the old table on which this article is based
:C mon 21:34, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Old table

message: There are a few pages, which could better be lemmas of this page instead of separate pages. They're all pages with dutch names referring to political phenomena. Also they're only a few, tend short, often orphanized and not terribly well written. I intend to merge them with this page. 
A list of them:
*Allochtoon
*Polder Model
*Schout
*Queen's Commissioner
*Water board
What do you think? Keep or merge? --C mon 13:16, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorporating pages

message: Since Rotterdam is divided into deelgemeenten the term stadsdeel only applies to Amsterdam. I suggest the entry be corrected or perhaps even removed completely because of its narrow scope.
-Tonkiro 14:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stadsdeel 

message: --CopyToWiktionaryBot 12:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007-02-7 Automated pywikipediabot message 

message: I've decided that this page does not work very well, the problem is that 
# not all people know that this list exists, especially not the people one would make this for
# It is getting too large
# it is outdated
Therefore I've started to cut this page up, mostly by creating separate pages based on this page. For now I will keep this page, if only because I've been unable to find a good way to deal with several entries. C mon 15:14, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Issue one can be solved by making sure that the list is wikilinked when useful; otherwise people will not learn the partial lists exist as well. Arnoutf 17:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I did not make short lists but mainly short articles. See my contributions. C mon 19:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wow, that is a lot of interesting work you have undertaken. That will make checking up on the differnt terms much easier. Arnoutf 19:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cutting up this page