Template talk:Political parties in the Netherlands
Appearance
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
reversion
[edit]I reverted the merger of this template and the historical dutch parties template by user:electionworld here. I have several reasons
- The merger was not done well it just merged the info of the two templates without any logic or consideration. It was split between 5 ideological categories and 3 levels of representation: it was a chaotic and illogical
- The merger is uncalled for: there are not rules calling for a minumum number of templates. The only logical rule is that we want consistent uncloggy, clear and not overly large templates. The merged template was inconsistent, cloggy, unclear and overly large
- The merger should have passed through an TfD. It should atleast have been discussed
- I don't see why these two of the total 6 Dutch party template should be merged.
I would prefer if any further merge would be discussed first. C mon 20:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Duplicates
[edit]How do people feel about removing duplicates by merging the Senate, HoR and EP rows to one "nationally represented" row? Dajasj (talk) 11:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Definitely, preferably without the seat counts or EP groups. Navboxes are for navigation, not for information. Luxorr (talk) 13:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
CU-SGP
[edit]CU-SGP is now in the list of parties that has national or European representation, but that isn't true anymore. Dajasj (talk) 07:19, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Noted, I've moved the alliance down to local parties (while also represented in a provincial council, it's not a regional combination per se). Adding CU–SGP to its constituent parties in (euro)parliament was mostly done for organizational purposes. --NFSreloaded (talk) 13:30, 15 August 2024 (UTC)