Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Netherlands

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Netherlands (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

New article Cannabis in the Netherlands needs work[edit]

We have a "Cannabis in..." article for I think around 89 countries now, so it was high time to add one for the Netherlands. It can probably be spruced up with some existing content from other articles, notifying the project here in case anyone wants to help improve it. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 00:16, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

I've also created Cannabis in Suriname, which could use help from a Dutch speaker, and/or would be useful translated for Dutch Wikipedia. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:53, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
I could particularly use help from Dutch speakers to find sources which verify the years in which cannabis became prohibited in the Netherlands, and in Suriname (and any other Dutch colonies) if anyone here would enjoy a historical scavenger-hunt! Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 06:32, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
There are enough articles to populate this category, but what would the correct category term be in Dutch for "cannabis edibles" or "cannabis foods" as a corollary category to Cannabis foods? Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:16, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages[edit]

Magic Wand Icon 229981 Color Flipped.svg

Greetings WikiProject Netherlands Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, SteviethemanDelivered: 18:04, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Reliability of GossipGay?[edit]

Hello everyone! During the GAN review for the article Gagged (Violet Chachki EP), the reviewer advised me to verify the reliability and appropriateness of the following source that was cited in the article: ( The website "" has not been discussed on here previously. I cited this source as it was an interview with primary subject of the article (Violet Chachki). I primarily used the source for Chachki's responses about questions relating the EP and album. I was wondering if someone could verify whether or not this source is reliable or not. I completely understand if it is not deemed appropriate for use on Wikipedia (as the reviewer pointed out the website does not show an editorial board, nor do they explain their journalism policy). I am posting my message on this WikProject as the site in question is a News/Media Website from the Netherlands, and I was encouraged to ask users familiar with the Netherlands about its reputation by a discussion on WP:RSN. I have added the part of the interview being cited in my article below:

If required, I could substitute this source with others that contain the same or very similar information. Thank you for any help! I am still relatively new to Wikipedia, so I greatly appreciate any feedback or support so that I can be better on here. Aoba47 (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

On the page Over ons (About us), the editors are not identified and call themselves simply "Team Gossipgay". They explain that their goal is to make the LGBT world more transparent by means of entertainment, information, and news. I have no reason to believe the interview is fake, so I don't think there would be a problem quoting from it. If you or others have doubts about the authenticity, then perhaps you should use a different source. – Editør (talk) 15:09, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
@Editør:Thank you for your response. I agree and believe that there is no reason to believe the interview is fake or misrepresented. I will relay your contribution to the RSN. Thank you again, I greatly appreciate your input. Aoba47 (talk) 17:24, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Spelling conventions for the digraph IJ[edit]

Not sure where to report this, so I'm putting it here. To avoid continued edit warring, I'd like other editors' opinions on the issue of how to handle the capitalization of the digraph ij/IJ. One editor seems to think (discussion 1, discussion 2) that it should be capitalized as Ij instead of IJ, or that it somehow is an acronym instead of a digraph -- I don't even know. I reverted their edits and page moves, because as far as I know the convention is to capitalize it as IJ, but currently the discussions aren't really going anywhere and it's starting to look like an edit war and honestly I don't feel like spending any more time and energy trying to combat this. The main article in question is IJsbrand, but IJ (Amsterdam) and IJmuiden have also been affected. — Kleio (t · c) 01:07, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

The digraph ij should be capitalized as IJ: source 1 source 2 source 3. – Editør (talk) 19:16, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Dutch involvement in the Syrian Civil War[edit]

Any one interested in expanding the Article of the Dutch involvement in the Syrian Civil War. Thanks.Mr.User200 (talk) 21:46, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Category:Recipients of the Cross for the Four Day Marches has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Recipients of the Cross for the Four Day Marches, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 12:16, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Glass negatives by early photographer Jan Goedeljee now on Commons[edit]

Jan Goedeljee (1824-1905) was a Dutch photographer working in his hometown Leiden and its surroundings. Erfgoed Leiden en Omstreken, the Leiden municipal archive, holds a large collection of his glass negatives, which have been digitised and made available for re-use on Wikimedia Commons. The collection includes photos of many well-known places in Leiden, such as the Academy Building and the Hortus Botanicus, and of buildings that have since disappeared, such as the old post office, several city-gates and the old railway station. The upload was done by Erik Zachte, using Pattypan and a custom script for the conversion of the metadata. Access the collection here. Regards, --AWossink (talk) 13:26, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Names of Dutch windmills[edit]

Copied from user talk:Yngvadottir
Hi, re your recent moves of articles about Dutch windmills; in Dutch, the mills do take the definite article as part of their name (De Kat, Het Pink etc). This is shown by their listing on such sites as the Molendatabase. Also over at WP:MILLS, we generally house article as title in the style (mill name, location) for named mills, or (location windmill) for unnamed mills. Mjroots (talk) 06:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

After I moved the two articles and made the changes to the template so that they would show in black on their own pages, I noticed that. But that's not how it's done on the Dutch Wikipedia—I checked both before moving them, in case there was such a convention, or a need for the placename for disambiguation—and we don't add/retain the foreign-language definite article for other classes of objects that I know of, except where it's enclitic (as it is in Ouddeelsmolen, for example). It seems like a romantic convention, but if it isn't even being followed by the Dutch, what justification is there for such complicated titles in an English-language general reference work? Yngvadottir (talk) 06:59, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
In many cases, disambiguation by place name will be needed (Witte Molen, Oude Molen etc), possibly not in the case of De Lytse Geal. I'm totally against translating the names of the mills at the article title as there will be virtually zero sources that do that. Thus De Grote Molen, Broeksterwoude instead of The Great Mill, Broeksterwoude. A look at nl:Lijst van windmolens in Friesland shows that the naming convention with the definite article is used at nl-wiki, but not always. Mjroots (talk) 09:47, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I agree (and not for example "The Elephant") unless by chance windmill scholars writing in English know one of the mills by an English name. It's possible that usage differs regionally in the Netherlands; I only happened to be looking at what linked to Huizum and to find two mills in the same Frisian location. It's also possible that it has changed. Please talk about it at WP:MILLS if you haven't already; I won't make further trouble, but I did not self-revert because I cannot see adequate justification. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:53, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Throwing this out for wider discussion. This concerns the move of De Lytse Geast, Tytsjerk to Lytse Geast and the move of De Himriksmole, Tytsjerk to Himriksmole. WP:MILLS does not have many members, and there are likely to be many Dutch members here. Are Dutch windmill article better housed at the the style (mill name, location) where the mill has a name, or would they be better at just (mill name) with no indication as to whether the mill is a windmill or something else? My preference is for the former. Mjroots (talk) 19:56, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

As long as the place name is not needed for disambiguation then it may even be a good idea to leave it out of the article name. Many drainage mills are way out into the countryside, located far from the village they belong to and may even be closer to other places, so adding the place name may cause confusion. In these specific cases, Lytse Geast is the name of the nearby hamlet, Tytsjerk is about 6 km away so stating it is "in" Tytsjerk is a bit of a stretch. The mill is most commonly called "Ouddeelsmolen" so I suggest moving it to that name. The Himriksmole windmill itself has been moved twice and the municipal boundary has moved as well. It is now located in and owned by the municipally Leeuwarden though situated closer to Tytsjerk. It should now be called Himriksmûne according the local variant of frisian but someone many years ago stuck a sign on the mill spelling Himriksmole and it has entered the windmill databases under that name so I think its better to stick to that or use the dutch name 'Hemriksmolen'. Beware that many windmills in the Netherlands do not have official or fixed names so they may be contentious and tend to change over time. Reboelje (talk) 15:58, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Requesting an assessment[edit]

User:BasBr1 requested the assessment of an article, moved from Wikipedia:WikiProject Netherlands/Assessment:

– Editør (talk) 13:16, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Bernardo Guillermo[edit]

The article about Bernardo Guillermo, son of Princess Christina of the Netherlands, was nominated for deletion. – Editør (talk) 09:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)