Elections and Referendums Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Netherlands Template‑class

This template 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.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This template was considered for deletion on 22 March 2022. The result of the discussion was "no consensus".

Please note that the elections template series is limited to:

Presidential elections Senate/upper house elections Parliament/lower house elections National referenda

There is a seperate template for EU elections and local/regional elections should also have their own template, otherwise the boxes will become oversized.

Thanks Number 57 09:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have five arguments to revert the back to version I have created

1. The criteria for inclusion are sloppy why include referenda but exclude European elections: as the sole national referendum concerned the European Union and as there were only six European elections, I think that we might as well include them here. There is no good reason to include national referenda over European parliament elections.
2. European Union election are more similar to referenda: these elections share the same characteristics as the national elections, same district(s), same parties etc. European elections are also included in the Elections in the Netherlands.
3. The current division between European and national elections makes easy navigating (the goal of navigating templates) between EU and national elections impossible: it implies that EU elections have nothing to do with national politics.
4. The standardization of templates is both undiscussed and not as far reaching as Number 57 claims: Israel has prime ministerial elections, the Belgian one excludes its 1946-referendum, as does the Swedish one and the UK one. The consistency is overrated.
5. Finally I think the edit which reverted my actions was was sloppy: the editor changed this template but did not remove it from the European parliament election pages and by flagging it as a minor edit with summary "Oops" is not a good edit summary for such a change. I have reverted the edit.

I hope these points will be answered. C mon 10:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK,

1. Regarding European elections, they are not carried out at the national level, but rather (at least in the UK) by regions, with some irregularities, such as Gibraltar being included in the UK for EU elections, but not national elections. They do not affect national politics in the way other national elections or votes do, and in this way are also more similar to local/regional elections. Referenda shape national policy. EU elections shape EU policy.
2. European elections do not necessarily share the same characteristics as national elections. Some countries use different districts (UK again being one). Parties also differ slightly as many anti-EU parties appear during EU elections.
3. European elections do indeed have very little to do with national politics; EU parliament members cannot vote on national matters, only EU matters, and also shown by sharply differing results of EU and national elections
4. The standardisation is a work in progress. I was not aware of the referenda you mention, and they will be added to those templates in the near future
5. I have no idea why the summary came out like that, as I made two edits. The first was a revert, with an edit summary stating why (rv to last edition by NightStallion; EU elections have seperate template), but for some reason, though the template appeared to save, it was unchanged on my screen. Assuming I made a mistake and didn't delete the EU section, I made a second edit with the edit summar Ooops, which I assumed was easily explained by the edit seconds previously which had obviously gone wrong. I saved it a second time. However, when I checked the history, my first edit did not appear for whatever reason, and I couldn't change the edit summary.

Number 57 10:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think your approach suffers from one problem: you try to standardize cross-nationally, overlooking national diversity: the Dutch EP elections occur at a national level; the Dutch referendum was European in nature and was far more important for the European polity than for the Dutch polity; furthermore provincial elections affect the composition of the Dutch senate and are therefore important on the national level; the Dutch have parties in the senate that are not in the lower house and vice versa like party systems differ at the EU level. The Dutch are different in this, like the Belgians are different in other things: their regional governments are so important that I would include them in their national template. Although I endorse standarization in principle, it should be able to reflect national differences. So I don't think standardization is a good plan in this case. C mon 23:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Senate elections in the Netherlands take place within 3 months after the Provincial elections and are indirect in nature: the Provincial representatives choose the senate. This is all governed by the same act (the Elections act) and takes place nationally (in 1 go) every 4 years. I see this template was restricted to direct elections by now, but see in the title no reason for that (this is a "Dutch election" after all), and it also only increases template size by a single (or double on some screens line). I therefore propose to add the Senate elections to the template and would welcome your views. L.tak (talk) 20:53, 19 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This series of national election templates does not include indirect elections. Hence why Senate elections are not included on ((French elections)), presidential elections are not included on ((German elections)) (except the two direct ones during the Weimar Republic) and Federal Council elections are not included in ((Swiss elections)). All three groups have their own template or are on another one (((French Senate)), ((German presidential elections)) and ((Swiss Federal Council elections)). Number 57 22:02, 19 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I understand that is the choice that has been made now, hence my suggestion to change it. When thinking about elections (eg in our elections page of the Netherlands) we always include it, and it is only clear from the template talk page why they are not included. Wouldn't thus it be more intuitive to add them (we can think about making the others consistent later, but I don't know the French and German situation well enough to judge)? L.tak (talk) 00:18, 20 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't believe it would be intuitive to do so as they are not elections in which the public have a vote. Adding them would be creep that would be used to justify other non-public elections to other templates like this. Number 57 09:14, 20 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That distinction however (direct/indirect) is not the intuitive distinction, when you make a template on "elections" (rather than "direct elections"). That is clearly seen from the elections article, but also from the press coverage etc. But thanks for the clarification, and lets see if others way in... L.tak (talk) 01:13, 21 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As stated in my edit summaries, I think the island council elections should be included in the municipal elections line as the islands are municipalities. Having a separate line is unnecessary – we need to keep these templates as small as possible and having an almost entirely empty line for the island council elections isn't an improvement IMO. Aréat, would you care to give a third opinion on this dispute? Cheers, Number 57 17:19, 15 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don't these islands have their own election templates already? With special status. Seem to me they could be treated the same as Aruba and Curaçao. Not that they're the same, I know. The latter are Netherlands constituents parts, but here it essentially lead to the same : they've got their own system and their own election schedule. --Aréat (talk) 21:11, 15 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you suggesting removing them altogether and just adding the Bonaire/Saba/Sint Eustasius templates to the below section? Number 57 21:40, 15 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]