Talk:List of prime ministers of the Netherlands

On the Template talk:Dutch Prime Ministers some interesting points have been raised vis-a-vis, who should be included on this list. The original maker of the template (User:Aecis) only went as far as Jan Kappeyne van de Coppello (1877), and user:Känsterle wants to expand this to include this entire list. But because

the position of prime minister was codified in the constitution in 1983
the ministry of general affairs was created in 1937
the chair of the cabinet roated between its members until at least 1901

I think it is this list that is problematic, because it lists people who were supposedly prime minister went the position had no constitutional status. I think that the article should at least reflect the different constitutional positions of the different prime ministers. C mon 09:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We could make the distinction as it is made on the Dutch wikipedia article, which consists of a list of presidents of the council of ministers (until 1945) and a list of prime ministers from 1945 onward. This would of course still not reflect their 'official' position, but the problem is: the de facto position grew and changed over the years. Only small parts of the development of his position were codified de iure at the dates you mention (some haven't even been codified, such as his responsibility for coordination of government policy). What I am trying to point out is: it is very hard to put exact dates, years or persons on specific changes in the PM's position.

Apart from that issue, it makes sense to me to start in 1848 when the present day Dutch constitutional structure was founded.--Dengo 19:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Prime minister had no constitutional status in the United Kingdom until 1905... john k 22:16, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Religion

I was thinking about adding a column in the table listing each PM's personal religion, and I will do so later unless anyone objects. Static Sleepstorm 15:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are deeply committed to doing this you should, but on the face of it, it isn't worth it, because every RKSP/KVP PM is catholic and every other (except for Lubbers and Van Agt (CDA)) are protestant or have an unclear religious status (like Kok). C mon 16:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What you've said is entirely true, but I've already done it now. And besides, to someone who does not know too much about Dutch politics and is reading this article, what I have added might be helpful.

There are quite a few whose religion is uncertain, so I'll see what I can find out and ammend the page at a later date if I find anything new. I think it's a pretty safe bet that all the Protestants are members of the Dutch Reformed Church, but sources would be needed specifically saying that the individuals are. Static Sleepstorm 17:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually no, most of the protestant were member of the Reformed Church in the Netherlands which is a different church. (hervormd vs. gereformeerd in Dutch). C mon 18:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Political affiliation of Prime Minister Mackay

In the colour graph the political affiliation of Prime Minister Aeneas Mackay is indicated as KVP. This is incorrect; it should be ARP. Could someone change it?

Non-free media use

There apparently are five prime minsters with currently only non-free images. With each of these images there is this line:

Purpose of use: This image should only be used on the person-lemma and information on Prime Ministers of the Netherlands

This page fits the description "information on Prime Ministers of the Netherlands" and people will keep re-adding the images to complete the list until ESkog gives up reverting it and finds him/herself some free images. One could avoid this by hiding the images and leaving a (hidden) message with them rather than deleting them, but this solution was instantly "fixed" by Garion96 with an ever so useful edit summary ("fix"). Can someone explain the rationale for the deletions and fixes? Is the above "purpose-of-use" line incorrect perhaps? Afasmit (talk) 12:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Our policies and guidelines prohibit the use of non-free images on list articles. I don't have a problem with leaving a comment in the article code that these spaces should only use free images. In other similar list articles, folks have used the standard "No free image" placeholder, or a coat-of-arms image, to make the table appear more complete. Incidentally, in most of these articles where I've performed this cleanup, we're up to 100% of the names represented by a free image. They're public people; it's not that hard to find if you actually start looking. (ESkog)^(Talk) 13:34, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. non-free images fail the non-free content criteria on this list. Regarding a hidden message, that might be useful. But to have the non-free image hidden in the article makes no sense since there is no way these images will ever be allowed in the article. Garion96 (talk) 13:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Annoyingly, there are now licensed photos of Biesheuvel and de Quay at commons, but these have identical file names to the non-free images saved on the English wiki project. Someone with some authority on commons needs to change the file names. BartBassist (talk) 22:51, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Color Selection

Is it possible to have a greater color distinction between Conservative and Liberal Prime Ministers? There are a lot of colors available and selecting a slightly darker tone of the same color doesn't make a lot of sense. Just my 2¢. Jtyroler (talk) 09:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the similarity of colour is deliberate: it illustrates the lack of clear distinction or division between different political factions in early Dutch politics. However, it is certainly true that two shades of blue with greater contrast could be found. BartBassist (talk) 09:14, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Koning-willem-alexander-okt-15-s.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:22, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:40, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]