Talk:Netherlands/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Name of article: Netherlands or The Netherlands?

Is anyone opposed to moving this article to the proper location (including the)? Compare other countries with articles in the name, as The Gambia and Republic of the Congo/Democratic Republic of the Congo (Zaire) and all the "… of the Netherlands" articles. Jordi·✆ 11:23, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I won't oppose it, in fact I'd definitely support it! --Vamp:Willow 12:19, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Since I cannot move it myself I'm requesting it on WP:RM: please vote there for it. Jordi·✆ 12:16, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

From [1]:

Netherlands → The Netherlands

The name of the country in English includes the article, as it is a plural form and direct translation of the Dutch 'De Nederlanden'. The singular form would be *Netherland, which does not exist. Compare also other countries with articles in the name, as The Gambia and Republic of the Congo/Democratic Republic of the Congo (Zaire) and all the "… of the Netherlands" articles. Jordi·✆ 12:15, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

  • Support. For consistency do you propose to move any/all other articles and categories to include "The Netherlands" as well? Timrollpickering 12:28, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • Many if not most already have the Netherlands in the name, and as I plan to go over most of these articles anyway I will make sure that "the" is included everywhere. Jordi·✆ 12:33, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I moved it.--Patrick 12:58, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)
I am stronly against it. Are we going to move United States to The United States, United Kingdom to The United Kingdom, Scottish Highlands to The Scottish Highlands. I was surprised that the move took place during the discussion art Wikipedia:Requested moves. There is now there a general discussion, which tends not to include The in the title of the page of country names. Gangulf 21:27, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I have moved the page back to the Netherlands. This page was moved without going properly through the Wikipedia:Requested moves process, as the requested move was prematurely deleted (see [2]). If someone wants to move the article to The Netherlands, it should be relisted on Wikipedia:Requested moves and go through the process properly. —Lowellian (talk) 03:15, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

Move back to Netherlands ?

Lowellian moved this article to the wrong location. Fortunately I could move it back. For any future over-eager editor: the name of the nation is The Netherlands, a direct translation of De Nederlanden (the Low Lands). It should not be moved to Netherlands: if there was a form without the article this would be Netherland, which is not used in English. Jordi·✆ 08:06, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Whatever the correct name is, this must go properly through Wikipedia:Requested moves. It didn't last time, when it was removed from Wikipedia:Requested moves almost as soon as it was put up, before there could be any debate (see [3]). —Lowellian (talk) 18:01, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

Although I moved it earlier to The Netherlands, comparing with United States, "The" may not be needed.--Patrick 13:32, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(definite_and_indefinite_articles_at_beginning_of_name)#Rule_of_thumb. Usually one does not capitalize the "the" in "the Netherlands" inside a sentence, which would mean that the article name should be without "The".--Patrick 14:05, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The Netherlands cannot be compared with United States. The short form of Kingdom of the Netherlands is normally The Netherlands, and while a form Netherlands does occur this is always prefixed by "the" in a sentence. From CIA factbook: "The Netherlands remained neutral in World War I, but suffered invasion and occupation by Germany in World War II. A modern, industrialized nation, the Netherlands is also a large exporter of agricultural products." "The Netherlands has a prosperous and open economy, which depends heavily on foreign trade." "The Netherlands, along with 11 of its EU partners, began circulating the euro currency on 1 January 2002.", etc. The form 'Netherlands' (without the article) is nowhere used in the article itself except when listing the short name (where it is acceptable). Any and all references to the country must include 'the'. Jordi·✆ 14:17, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Your argument doesn't work because the same could be applied to the US: I could use almost the exact same wording. The short form of The United States of America is normally The United States, and while a form United States does occur this is always prefixed by "the" in a sentence. From CIA factbook: "were recognized as the new nation of the United States of America following the Treaty of Paris..." "The US has the largest and most technologically powerful economy..." "undocumented nationals from Mexico and Central America continue to enter the United States illegally", etc. The form 'United States' (without the article) is nowhere used in the article itself except when listing the short name (where it is acceptable). Any and all references to the country must include 'the'...and yet Wikipedia still places the article at United States, showing that your argument that the usage in the CIA Factbook does not mean that Netherlands must be preceded by an article in Wikipedia. —Lowellian (talk) 18:15, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
However, people talk about "United States foreign policy", "the" is optional, it isn't for "The Netherlands". The principal difference as I see it is that (The) United States is an English name, The Netherlands is an English translation of a Dutch name. Translations, and so it won't necessarily follow standard rule of English (in as much as there are any). Compare The Hague. Thryduulf 19:41, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This must go properly through Wikipedia:Requested moves. It didn't last time, when it was removed from Wikipedia:Requested moves almost as soon as it was put up, before there could be any debate (see [4]). —Lowellian (talk) 18:01, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

Place it there then. Do not move it back to the wrong location without discussion. Jordi·✆ 20:23, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The onus is upon you to place the request there, since you moved it from the original location. And which location is the "wrong" location is open to debate. —Lowellian (talk) 09:42, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
Not quite. You want to move it: then place it on WP:RM. I don't see you adding {{move|Netherlands}} on top of the article, or a new entry on WP:RM. Since you are apparently convinced that the country is not called The Netherlands, I can only assume that this means that you'll also want to change History of the Netherlands to History of Netherlands, etc.? I urge you to follow the normal procedure before making these drastic changes. Jordi·✆ 09:54, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

According to [5] it is The Gambia, The Hague, The Dalles, Oregon, and The Mall (Washington, DC), but the Netherlands and the United States.--Patrick 23:50, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The rule you cite mentions that in the case of the Netherlands, "the" is not capitalized. It does not claim it is "Netherlands" rather than "the Netherlands". Jordi·✆ 18:58, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I combined U.S. Government Printing Office Style Manual and Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(definite_and_indefinite_articles_at_beginning_of_name)#Rule_of_thumb.--Patrick 21:56, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Compare however [6] and the other two links Cantus gave. Conclusion:

The Netherlands, together with the Bahamas, has "the" less often than The Gambia, but more often than the United States and the United Kingdom. Even so, the rule of thumb would still lead to Netherlands.--Patrick 12:22, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Jordi, this article belongs at The Netherlands. The only thing IMO to debate at this point is whether the should be capitalized. ;) -- Viajero 18:28, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
To me the The should be clearly capitalized. It's part of the country name! Thus we should move the page at The Netherlands. Julien Tuerlinckx 21:29, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
I harmonised use of the lower case "the Netherlands" throughout the article because it was sometimes capitalised and sometimes not. There is no official name or entity called "the Netherlands" or "The Netherlands. And even if there were, this would not forbid using lower case within a sentence. If the official name were "The United States of America", most publications would still print "in the United States". So there is no official or grammatical reason to treat "the Netherlands" differently from "the United States" or "the UK". Use of capitalisation was more common in the past; probably due to former official Dutch policy in documents written in English and especially due to Dutch influence on the spelling of treaties and European official documents etc. in English involving the Netherlands.
See the following two sites for natural and unnatural use of the article in English: http://europa.eu.int/abc/governments/netherlands/index_en.htm http://europa.eu.int/abc/governments/index_en.htm
It seems the perhaps once official Dutch policy on capitalisation has changed as can be seen at http://www.government.nl and http://pvnewyork.org/about_the/general_information/faqs
Dutch possibly official policy on use of non-omission the article is perhaps the cause of the idiosyncratic naming on the first page, where correct English would require parallel treatment for the UK, and where "The United Kingdom" would look old-fashioned and pompous because it is. So both should be without the article. Although the name of the paper is "The Times", for example, it is becoming much more common to print "in the Times" than "in The Times" in most English publications. And the example above with "...and United States foreign policy has..." in fact proves the opposite of what was intended; it is perfectly correct English to say "...and Netherlands foreign policy has..." if one feels obliged to avoid the more natural "Dutch".
In fact, there are good reasons for not letting Dutch spelling conventions decide how to spell "the Hague" either. The name of the city could be used just like that of the newspaper called "The Times", which in modern publications is usually spelled with a capitalised article only in situations like "called 'XYZ'"; elsewhere, when not citing the name, these same publications continue this way: "In 1905, he founded a controversial magazine called 'The New Age'. Many writers were at first reluctant to contribute to the New Age, but that soon changed."
The following links provide clear, common sense help based on a sound feel for the language. --Espoo 15:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

http://www.chicagomanual.org/cmosfaq.CapitalizationTitles.html http://fmwriters.com/community/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=17&topic_id=33574&mesg_id=33576

Plurality

"The Netherlands (Plural, in Dutch Nederland (singular)) is the European part"

This is clearly silly. If it was really plural we would be writing "The Netherlands are the European part. I'm therefore going to remove the "plural" and "singular" bits. Morwen - Talk 17:19, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I reverted the change to "The Netherlands are" etc., I checked Google, although not uncommon, it is less common.--Patrick 15:49, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Economy text is partly twice

The last paragraph of the economy text is an almost duplicate of the first paragraph.

It seems so. I'd say: do something about it ;-)

RFC Opened

I opened an RFC on this. Please do not move the page again until community has decided.

To summarize:

  • Is the country name Netherlands as Lowellian claims, or The Netherlands?
  • Should the article therefore be moved to Netherlands, or left at The Netherlands?
  • Should users be allowed to make a move unilaterally just because they disagree with a previous move?

Jordi·✆ 10:08, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Please don't misrepresent the situation here. Since the article was originally at Netherlands, the questions are:

  • Is the country name The Netherlands as Anárion claims, or Netherlands?
  • Should the article therefore be moved to The Netherlands, or left at Netherlands?
  • Should users be allowed to make move unilaterally and remove entries from WP:RM before a proper period of discussion (see [7])?

—Lowellian (talk) 10:22, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Please don't spread any lies. I removed the request from WP:RM, where I had originally placed it [following discussion on this talk page [8], only after the page was moved — and not by me. Besides, your apparent disagreement with a previous page move does not warrant a page move to the previous location without discussion. If you'd care to look up the Netherlands in other source material, you'd find that the name of the country is THE Netherlands, not Netherlands. Jordi·✆ 10:26, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The current location is The Netherlands, so placing it at Netherlands would be a controversial move, which may not be dealt with without prior discussion on WP:RM. Jordi·✆ 10:39, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
And the page was originally at Netherlands, and the page was moved w/o proper discussion on WP:RM. —Lowellian (talk) 11:19, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
But after long discussions on this article's talk page. It has been on The Netherlands for some time now without complaints, so the issue cannot be that controversial. Jordi·✆ 11:22, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Where have I lied? I said the article was originally at Netherlands. I said that that you removed the entry from WP:RM. That also is true. —Lowellian (talk) 10:36, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
"Should users be allowed to make move unilaterally". You claim I moved the article to the current location "unilaterally", which is an obvious lie. I raised the issue on this talk page, waited for replies, and only then placed it on WP:RM. This request got support votes, and was then moved by another user. I then deleted the move request, as it was a fait accompli. Jordi·✆ 10:39, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I am sorry the phrase was interpreted that way. I meant that one user moved it almost as soon as the entry went up on WP:RM, and a second user (you) removed the entry almost immediately, thus cutting off discussion from other parties, which is what I meant by the word "unilateral". I have now stricken out the offending phrase. Hope that clarifies what I said above. —Lowellian (talk) 11:13, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
Nevertheless, you violated WP:RM policy. You removed an entry after 22 minutes. 22 minutes! How can there be proper discussion in such a short period? Most people never even saw the WP:RM. —Lowellian (talk) 11:13, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
Quite honestly, I never assumed anyone would actually be FOR placing the article on Netherlands: the country is called the Netherlands after all (not Netherlands), and there was nobody on this article's talk page who objected to a move. The only reason I placed it on WP:RM in the first case was that I was unable to move it myself. Since it got quick support votes and was moved by another user almost instantly, I took that to mean that others agreed it was not really necessary to place the article on WP:RM, as the issue was a technical one, not controversiality. Since you apparently now disagree with the past move, in retrospect the procedure perhaps was not exactly followed, but that does not mean you can just unilaterally decide to now move the article to Netherlands.
For a moment ignore the history and just look at it anew: you apparently believe the Netherlands should be Netherlands. I happen to disagree. Since you want to move an article (as it is currently at the location you believe is incorrect), you should place it on WP:RM. Add the template to the article etc., so normal voting can occur. I can guarantee you I won't remove it from WP:RM. Jordi·✆ 11:20, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
An RFC isn't the right place. Moves are decided on talk page in a discussion listed on WP:RM (qv below). --Tony Sidaway|Talk 11:44, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Requested move

The Netherlands → Netherlands

Discussion

Move

  1. The definite article is superfluous. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 11:44, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  2. The definite article is left out in other-language wikipedias as well. German: Niederlande, French: Pays-Bas, Spanish: Países Bajos, Italian: Paesi Bassi, etc. --Fedor 12:22, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  3. "The" is not capitalized within a sentence (see e.g. U.S. Government Printing Office Style Manual); combine this with Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(definite_and_indefinite_articles_at_beginning_of_name)#Rule_of_thumb.--Patrick 15:17, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  4. I'd go with what the CIA factbook says is the conventional short form in English. Jonathunder 15:29, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC)
  5. Gut instinct and my Hutchinson's encyclopaedia agree that it's 'the Netherlands', however atlases from three different publishers and a geographical reference book say that it's 'Netherlands' (as does the map in use on the article). Having lived there for over a year, I thought I'd have known the correct form. Noisy | Talk 19:17, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
  6. "the" is not part of the State's name. Use "in the Netherlands", etc. in articles. zoney ♣ talk 11:49, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  7. Netherlands if only to get it place alphabetically correctly in categories. It may usually be the Netherlands when written, but so is the United Kingdom, the Basque Country and others. If it was convention to write about The Netherlands, then things might be different.--Henrygb 23:19, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  8. This have been moved back and forth from many times, by the way, this may be useful. — Instantnood 00:35, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)
    Not many times. To the best of my knowledge, just once before, and that time, debate was stifled after a mere 22 minutes. See [9]. —Lowellian (talk) 21:57, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
  9. Compare to the United States and the United Kingdom. —Lowellian (talk) 22:26, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)
    But: compare to The Gambia. (no vote; I don't really care either way) Eugene van der Pijll 22:37, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  10. Agree with Henrygb to MOVE (to Netherlands. Gangulf 17:39, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  11. Move it. I thought this had been settled. — Trilobite (Talk) 07:39, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  12. violet/riga (t) 21:07, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  13. Move. I was born in the Netherlands and now live in the United States. In neither case the article is part of the short name. I suggest deleting it both for Netherlands and Gambia... gidonb 03:42, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Keep

  1. The name of the country is The Netherlands (captialisation of "the" varies). Thryduulf 12:16, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  2. Oppose. The definite article is a part of the name (as in The Gambia &c.). Compare also related articles like History of the Netherlands: not History of Netherlands. If there were a form without "the", the country would be called Netherland. Our internal naming policies even state "Except for titles of works, proper names, or official names, avoid the definite ("the") and indefinite ("a"/"an") articles at the beginning of a page name." The Netherlands clearly falls under this exception. Jordi·✆ 12:18, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    I agree with the naming of History of the Netherlands instead of History of Netherlands, I oppose The Netherlands as article name for the general article on this low country I live in. Gangulf 13:29, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  3. Keep at The Netherlands. Several sources agree: Encarta, Britannica, US State Dept. ?Cantus…☎ 03:54, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
    The proof is in the pudding. The Encarta article is named http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761572410/Netherlands.html, so under Netherlands, Brittanica wants you to cite the page as "Netherlands, The." Encyclopædia Britannica from Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service, 'the US State Dept. List of Independent states in the world lists Netherlands and the contentlist of Background notes ([10] uses also Netherlands and the CIA World Fact Book lists it under Netherlands. My old fashioned encyclopedias (books) list the country always under the N. Gangulf 13:27, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  4. Keep at The Netherlands. As Cantus's Anti-Google test has clearly shown, it is the name that is most often used by reputable reference sources including other encyclopedias. BlankVerse ∅ 11:31, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    But do these sources give the page the name The Netherlands or Netherlands. I am quite sure that most sources would list the country under Netherlands and name the country the Netherlands. Gangulf 13:17, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Other comments

CIA World Factbook
  • CIA World Factbook lists the following official names:
    • conventional long form: Kingdom of the Netherlands
    • conventional short form: Netherlands
    • local long form: Koninkrijk der Nederlanden
    • local short form: Nederland
I checked the CIA World Factbook on other countries and, as expected, it states for the US: 'conventional long form: United States of America; conventional short form: United States'. In other words, there is no difference between the United States and the Netherlands in that sense, as is sometimes suggested. Dengo
  • Netherlands government websites also seem to consistently use the lower case "the" in writing about the country. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:28, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The point is, "the" is ALWAYS included. Jordi·✆ 12:29, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
No - that's not a valid point. One can't use "Republic of Ireland" for example without "the" either - as in "I live in the Republic of Ireland". So it's always present. A lowercase the shows it's not part of the State's name. zoney ♣ talk 12:48, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
If you ask an Irishman the name of his country, does he say Republic of Ireland, or The Republic of Ireland? If you ask a Dutchman where he lives, he'll say The Netherlands, not Netherlands. Jordi·✆ 12:52, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
That argument doesn't work. If you ask an American where he lives, he'll say "the United States," but the Wikipedia article is still nevertheless located at United States. —Lowellian (talk) 22:01, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
Usually they'll say Ireland, but otherwise yes, "the Republic of Ireland". Some countries have to take the definite article as a prefix, but it does not follow that it is a part of their official name. (I'm not certain on the exact Netherlands situation, so I haven't voted, but I do discount the point being presented above).
zoney ♣ talk 13:54, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I'm not trying to be funny here, but when someone asks me where I'm from, I always say I'm from Holland. (technically thats another discussion, but it is comparable to an Irish saying I'm from Ireland instead of Republic of ...) Dengo
In a sentence, sure, you would use the definate article in front of many country names. I would never say, "I'm from United States." But "United States", without any article, is where I would expect to find it in an encylopedia. Jonathunder 15:36, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC)
Wikipedia in other languages

The definite article is left out in other-language wikipedias as well. German: Niederlande, French: Pays-Bas, Spanish: Países Bajos, Italian: Paesi Bassi, etc. --Fedor 12:22, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

That is because in other languages the proper name does not include the article. In English, it does (see the CIA factbook for example). This is not a discussion about the form of the official name in other languages, but about the location of the English language article for a country called The Netherlands in English. Jordi·✆ 12:29, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Wrong. In Spanish los Países Bajos is used within a phrase. ?Cantus…☎ 03:29, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
On the other hand, the country briefings article from The Economist is called 'Netherlands' Dengo
In other languages the proper name also includes the article. Why don't you check yourself? Fedor 13:51, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Anarion, the CIA World Factbook actually omits the definite article from the short form as I have shown. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:36, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
In other languages the proper name also includes the definite article. German: die Niederlande, French: les Pays-Bas, Spanish: los Países Bajos, Italian: i Paesi Bassi. Yet in all these wikipedias, the definite article is not included in the title. Fedor 07:10, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I don't really find the whole "definite article is missed out in German Wikipedia" argument and whatnot that convincing. Those are after all different languages--if we adopt conventions because they're used by other languages, we might as well the verb at the end of our sentences put. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 08:57, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Rule of thumb

I think we'd need a good reason to ignore the rule of thumb for use of the definite article in naming articles:

Official Netherlands government literature pretty consistently uses the lower case "the", so the rule of thumb firmly favors omitting it from the title of the article. It's just a rule of thumb, sure, but it's pretty unambiguous. We write about the United Kingdom, the United States and the Netherlands, and those articles should probably all be named without the definite article. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:20, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree. BTW: the last discussion on possible differences between the Netherlands and the United States did not convince me there is a difference. The argument of 'US foreign policy' as a correct term does not fly since 'US' is in this case an adjective and not a noun.Dengo

Mess up this article all you want, move it to Fluffy kitten for all I care. It's off my watchlist. Jordi·✆ 14:54, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The CIA Factbook convinced me, alright, as well as the rule of thumb. Anarion, can't you at least admit when you are wrong? For a person with your political persuasion, you sure are authoritarian. Fedor 17:04, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

CIA World Fact Book

The CIA World Fact Book - as do most sources - lists the country under Netherlands, and mentions at that page as official name Kingdom of the Netherlands. So please re-move the page back to its orginal location. Gangulf 15:29, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Since Anarion has bailed out of the discussion now, in the face of unrebuttable arguments. I suggest we do the move back as soon as possible. Why not right away? Fedor 17:07, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

<Talk:Netherlands

I proposed this on WP:RM so we should really follow the etiquette for that page. The sysops who do move duty will work through the list of pending moves, examining each discussion to see if there's a consensus, and performing the move if there is. Five days is normal and a discussion can be extended for longer if there is thought to be a chance of a consensus forming given more time. The Netherlands page has a history so only a sysop can do the move. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 17:45, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Found this on RfC... I understand the guidelines mentioned above, but from a language point of view it feels wrong. Maybe because it's one of the few countries with a plural name. For instance, when sending a letter there, one would write 'the Netherlands' in the address (and, 'United Kingdom' if not abbreviated to something else).
It's a matter of clarifying the noun... there are several kingdoms in the world, but only one United Kingdom, so that specifies it conclusively. The same goes for States. However, there is only one (set of) Netherlands in the world, hence known as The Netherlands.
I realize this may not sound very logically convincing, but for the record I do live there and would prefer including 'the'. Radiant_* 12:47, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
I also live there, and I would prefer the title of the article to be Netherlands Gangulf 20:12, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
By Radiant's argument above, we should have "The United States", "The Falkland Islands", etc. Or maybe I just don't follow his argument at all. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:46, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Decision

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 21:07, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Stupiditas won this time...:o(--MWAK 5 July 2005 17:24 (UTC)


Official Government site uses The Netherlands

Site: http://www.government.nl/index.jsp If it was 'Netherlands' , a beginning of a sentence would not start with 'The'. Marminnetje 16:25, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Netherlands/Archive_2&oldid=1074058990"