Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Netherlands
|This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Netherlands and anything related to its purposes and tasks.
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5|
|This WikiProject's subject is featured in the Outline of the Netherlands, which is incomplete and needs further development. That page, along with the other outlines on Wikipedia, comprise Wikipedia's Outline of knowledge, which also serves as the table of contents or site map of Wikipedia.|
|WikiProject Netherlands||(Rated Project-class)|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot II. Any threads with no replies in 3 months may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
Is "dorp" just a translation of village or is it more?
Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dorp (town). We could use input from more people familiar with the use of this word outside English. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:11, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
If anyone has time and inclination to look at Georgina Lara Booth, British-Dutch journalist and other things, that would be great. It reads promotional to me, but without knowing the sources and a bit more of the content, I'm not sure how to improve it. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 17:39, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- I agree. It looks like it is written by the same public relations team that wrote her bio on http://nl.mashable.com/u/georgina-booth and other social media. Nevertheless, quite an admirable youngster. I would suggest to request the main author to use a more appropriate and neutral Encyclopedia toneRuud Buitelaar (talk) 00:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi there! I am just starting to contribute to Wikipedia. First I wrote a couple of articles on the Dutch site, which I translated to the English Wikipedia. Amazing place. Absolutely fascinating. I joined this WPNL project a few days ago and I am doing a walk around town. I feel like a martian who just arrived on earth. I see a lot of beautiful buildings and places, some needing a fresh paint. I see also a lot of garbage and corpses lying around. I have not met many actual living people. So, what is the Netherlands WP about? The showcase FA class and GA class articles are gems in themselves but the full list looks like a rather random collection of topics. I guess that comes with the territory. There I came across that strange term: Netherlandish. Surely that is of interest for the WPNL? Early Netherlandish painting is one of our FA class articles. But most Netherlandish painters are not on our list: no Jan van Eyck, Rogier van der Weyden. Dieric Bouts, yes he is on our list. And the Limbourg brothers? No. Other famous Netherlandish people include our Hertog Jan, about whom I sang at primary school, John I, Duke of Brabant. He is not on our list. Ouch. Now we reach the part of Netherlandish literature. There is a canon of dutch literature list. Are the early Netherlandish authors on our list? Heinrich von Veldeke, yes. Jacob van Maerlant, no. Thomas a Kempis, no? What? another of my primary school famous names not on the list. What about Dutch music? The souterliedekens? No. Antwerp songbook? yes. I am pretty lost now. Erasmus? Fortunately, yes. Hey, there is Philips of Marnix, Lord of Saint-Aldegonde, author of our national anthem. What? No? Not on the list? Please, can anyone explain? I mean, seriously, what do you guys think about what does and what does not interest us as WPNL? Or should I just use my own judgement and place topics on our list? Or take some off the list? Thanks for your guidance. Nice to meet you.Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 02:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Bit of (older) Dutch translation needed.
- Hi! This is a very tricky one to translate. It requires good knowledge of 16th-century Dutch. The image is full with symbolic references for which you have to be familiar with the time and the context. I wouldn´t dare to try. The author is Rijksmuseum. I suggest you ask the museum. Try [email protected]Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 02:09, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Something else entirely??? Who, what?
This article may have problems of neutrality. It paints the activities of the foundation in a consistently positive light, repeats its viewpoints as fact, and presents a list of readings that are sympathetic to, or supportive of, its stated aims. The article also incorporates language derived from public statements made by the foundation. There is no in-text acknowledgement of these external sources, and no footnotes identifying them.
The article makes no mention of the controversial nature of the foundation in Dutch society. I find no citation of the many articles and websites that have voiced criticism of its stated aims. Their authors maintain, rightly or wrongly, that this is a right-wing foundation, engaged in the propagation of populist and potentially racist views under an intellectualist guise. The authors note, for example, that the foundation professes to raise public awareness about global overpopulation, but links it with the alleged overpopulation of the Netherlands. It calls for a 41% reduction of the Dutch population, from the current 17 million to 10 million. Whence its name. They also that the only effective measures to accomplish this aim -- setting aside the premature death of 2 out of 5 people living in Holland -- would involve a sharp reduction of immigration, if not a complete halt, and possibly the deportation of people who can be claimed, from certain viewpoints, not to belong in the Netherlands.
Judging from its website, the foundation does indeed hint at such measures, if only by reporting controversial viewpoints which it does nothing to contradict. Yet the measures have to do with Dutch national politics, rather than global overpopulation. Logic alone suggests that moving people elsewhere, or not letting them in to begin with, does nothing to reduce the world population. It is also a matter of logic that measures like these cannot solve a Dutch problem without creating one for other nations.
Observers have also noted that the foundation website mentions controversial public figures but makes no effort to distance itself from their chief nessage. These are the politicians Pim Fortuyn, Geert Wilders, and Thierry Baudet -- all of whom are widely perceived to engage, or to have engaged, in radical-right populism. On the contrary, the foundation appears to align itself with their viewpoints on population and migration.
I should also note that the article was created, and has been edited for the most part, by one and the same contributor who goes by the username "Janvanweeren". The only contributions to Wikipedia that this individual has made are to this particular article, "The Ten Million Club Foundation," nothing else. Tthe same is true of the Dutch Wikipedia article "Club van Tien Miljoen," where the same "Janvanweeren" accounts for the vast majority of edits. On the history page of the Dutch article, contributor "Janvanweeren" self-identifies (truthfully or not) as the Secretary of the foundation, who is indeed called Jan van Weeren. Let me emphasize that the personal identity of contributors to Wikipedia is nobody's business except their own. Yet it is fair to comment on a possibility raised by "Janvanweeren" himself, which if true would explain the problem in both the Dutch and English versions of the article, and would constitute a violation of Wikipedia's standards of integrity.
It is worth asking whether Wikipedia even needs an article on this particular foundation. It does not claim to have accomplished anything concrete, and seems interested mostly in gaining publicity -- for which purpose it apparently exploits Wikipedia as a platform.
I registered under a username last year and made some contributions as apprentice editor. But that is a long time ago, I cannot find the username I normally choose anywhere in Wikipedia. Until it comes back to me, I'm afraid the ISP address must suffice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:85:C380:49F0:B03E:FD05:32B2:C5E6 (talk) 06:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC)