Talk:Christian Union (Netherlands)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Netherlands

This article 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

Politics: Political parties Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

On 22 March 2018, it was proposed that this article be moved from Christian Union (Netherlands) to Christian Union (political party). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Page Location

The following discussion is an archived debate. The discussion is closed.

In my experience, the primary meaning of "Christian Union" among English-speakers at least in Britain is to refer to Christian groups in university and colleges; not to the Dutch political party (Google backs this up - googling for Christian Union gets mostly University groups, with the exception of a US denomination which also uses the name). I think this page should probably be at Christian Union (Netherlands), unless anyone has a better suggestion; and Christian Union should be about the Christian Union movement, or at least a disambiguation page. Thoughts? TSP 11:17, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Either Christian Union (Netherlands) or ChristenUnie would be OK. Eugene van der Pijll 20:59, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, yes. The Use English convention suggests that it should stay in English - unless the original Dutch is more commonly used in English than the Anglicisation is. Can anyone say whether this is the case or not? I'm afraid I don't often find myself discussing the political parties of the Netherlands... the web has plenty of instances of each being used in English-language web pages. TSP 01:48, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If the party is not commonly mentioned in English, then I think the rule implies that the English name should be used. --Erauch 18:29, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archived debate. The discussion is closed.

Many of the links to this page have still been using Christian Union, and have been referring to the party as "Christian Union" not ChristianUnion or ChristianUnie. I'm not passing comment, just making an observation. I have changed them to point directly here (since Christian Union is now a disambiguation, not a redirect), but I have kept the text the same (ie they still all say "Christian Union" but link here). Matt73 11:58, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The fifth largest party

The article currently reads "It is the fifth-largest party in the Netherlands with around 27,000 members." But the party is only the fifth largest qua members. Qua MPs the party is 8th. I think the current text is not clear on this. So I changed the article. But since some one reverted that I hoped first to see what other thought before changing it back. Any ideas? C mon 14:01, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure "Fifth largest qua members" is proper English; it looks more like Dutch to me. Perhaps that is why it was reverted. I have reformulated the statement, in a perhaps more Englishy style. Eugene van der Pijll 22:45, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reformed?

I would seem to me that calling the ChristianUnion a reformed party is incorrect, since some of the members are non-reformed evangelicals or pentecostals and even some catholics. One of the catholic members, Harry Notermans from Stramproy (a priest!), is mentioned in the following article. I can read Dutch, but I can imagine some of you can't, so I'll describe the things mentioned that are relevant to this discussion. This article (alike some other articles on the website) describes the current tendency of othodox catholics voting or even joining the ChristianUnion. The ChristianUnion welcomes these people. The party leader André Rouvoet in the media encourages other catholics to join aswell. So far the article. I would like to add that the members of the ChristianUnion are still predominantly reformed, but the party isn't exclusively reformed. There are many non-reformed protestants who represent the ChristianUnion in local councils and some of the candidates for the next parliamentary elections are non-reformed protestants aswell (the numbers four and five, Joel Voordewind and Cynthia Ortega-Martijn, for example). Looking at recent polls these two non-reformed protestants are likely to become members of parliament after 22 november. Catholics joining the ChristianUnion is a somewhat newer development.Jonathan van Tongeren 00:30, 26 september 2006 (UTC)

First off, I can read Dutch. Second, I want to stress that this party is not oecumenical christian but atleast protestant. I have mended that now, is that a compromise you can live with? C mon 07:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polling

"It had polled much better, with some polling stations predicting seven or eight seats."

After doing some editing to improve the language, this sentence kept bothering me. I am almost sure the author meant pollsters - not actual election ballots at polling stations. Having a paragraph about the CU always doing well in "opinion polls" would actually add some badly needed balance to the article (balance does not need criticism - there is actually very little yet to criticize the CU for, although I personally do not like the "langue de bois" so typical of communists in the old days - I agree that you only hear it with the minor CU politicians, not with Rouvoet).

Perhaps the sentence about opinion polls should include Andries Knevel and his EO talk show - or is that a Belgocentric view?--Pan Gerwazy 10:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Predecessors and issues

What I entered here, was based on what I could figure out from this [1].
I'd also add In social policies, asylum matters and environmental issues, the CU has much in common with Dutch left-wing parties such as PvdA, SP and the GreenLeft. In issues like drugs, medical ethics, Middle-East conflict and the foreign policy, CU's views differ strongly from those of the left-wing parties. E.J. 14:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is "orthodox Protestant"?

The article uses the term orthodox Protestant or orthodox reformed or some such several times without explanation. To me Orthodox in the context of Christianity means Eastern Orthodox, who are neither Protestant nor Reformed. Honestly I think the word orthodox should not be used here, but if it is to be used it at least needs explanation. --Trovatore (talk) 20:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orthodox is used here to refer to particularly strict forms of (reformed) protestantism, which involve strict moral beliefs and strict interpretation of the bible. Perhaps the term conservative or fundamentalist is more appropriate. C mon (talk) 21:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think another word should be found. Fundamentalist is probably not good because it's too specific to a particular movement in the United States, related to the set of tracts called The Fundamentals. Conservative might be OK if there's nothing more specific to this particular tendency in Dutch Protestantism. --Trovatore (talk) 09:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with C mon: "conservative", "fundamentalist" or even "evangelical" is fairly better than "orthodox". --Checco (talk) 14:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I recently edited (per accident) anonymously into the current version which has a foot note on Orthodoxo Protestant and adding some conservatives in the text. Which is, according to me, the best translation for the translation of "Orthodox Protestant" C mon (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, "fundamentalist" as it is commonly used carries with it connotations, and implies comparisons, that don't properly belong to the group being described here. Otherwise, if not for the loose handling it's had, it probably would be a good and descriptive word. So, although as is mentioned, "orthodox-protestantse" might unintentionally evoke an inappropriate association with Eastern Orthodoxy, on the whole it's less misleading than "fundamentalist". ("Orthodox Protestant" can't mean "Eastern Orthodox", whereas "fundamentalist" no longer even necessarily evokes the idea of orthodoxy. "Fundamentalist" might betoken "ignorant, mean and scary people" or "terrorist" much more often than it speaks of someone who believes that Jesus died and rose bodily from the grave to save sinners). I think that "confessional reformed Christian" is more descriptive, but I suppose there are problems with that as well. — Mark (Mkmcconn) ** 20:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the Dutch context the word "confessional" is used for any Christian-democratic political party, from Catholic to Protestant, from progressive to conservative. C mon (talk) 21:57, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orthodox Protestant is a theological current not an ideology, I would personally use something different. --Checco (talk) 07:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Christian Union (Netherlands). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot

(Report bug) 05:01, 6 December 2017 (UTC) – Paine Ellsworth ^put'r there 18:43, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 March 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Do not quite see agreement one way or the other in this debate. As is usual with a no-consensus outcome, editors can strengthen their arguments and try again in a few months to garner consensus for a different qualifier or title for this article. Have a Great Day and Happy Publishing! (closed by page mover) Paine Ellsworth ^put'r there 01:28, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Union (Netherlands) → Christian Union (political party) – This article was moved a in 2005 to the current name, Christian Union (Netherlands). Christian Union, however, is not a specific kind of "Netherlands" but a specific case of a political party. Hence my proposal to correct the title. Dutch political party should only be added if multiple political parties exists but this seems not to be the case. See Christian Union for more details, including for experiencing first hand how awkward this article's current name looks in the context of our Christian unions. gidonb (talk) 01:36, 22 March 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. -- Dane ^talk 02:04, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose (Netherlands) is a perfectly legitimate dab here given the other one is American. Also in Germany can refer to CDU and CSU; see Christian Democracy in the European Union, 1945/1995 Emiel Lamberts - 1997 "The rise of the Western part of Germany from the material, spiritual and cultural ashes was mainly attributable to Konrad Adenauer and the Christian Union parties (CDU / CSU) in which Catholics and Protestants united ..." In ictu oculi (talk) 07:50, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't this conflict with our consensual editing guideline WP:NCDAB?

Oppose as per above.--Autospark (talk) 14:29, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See also above. gidonb (talk) 03:46, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Might ChristenUnie be an appropriate title? Per WP:D, "When there is another term ... that is unambiguous, commonly used in English (even without being the most common term), and equally clear, that term is typically the best to use." ChristenUnie is used in English (e.g. here on the BBC); I've no idea how to quantify 'commonly'. TSP (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

TSP, thank you for raising this option. Checking it out, along with ChristianUnion, which is also sometimes used, and along with the current and suggested dab. In Google Books only:

"christian union" netherlands -wikipedia 8.6k hits

"christenunie" netherlands -wikipedia 1.2k hits

"christianunion" netherlands -wikipedia 0.3k hits

"christen unie" netherlands -wikipedia 0.5k hits

———

"christian union" party -wikipedia 55.6k hits

"christenunie" party -wikipedia 1.1k hits

"christianunion" party -wikipedia 0.3k hits

"christen unie" party -wikipedia 0.4k hits

These results indicate that the suggested name, Christian Union (political party), follows WP:COMMONNAME for the main phrase and both WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NCDAB for the dab. gidonb (talk) 04:17, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My above conclusions also stand firmly when adding "political":

"christian union" political party -wikipedia 20.3k hits

"christenunie" political party -wikipedia 0.7k hits

"christianunion" political party -wikipedia 0.3k hits

"christen unie" political party -wikipedia 0.3k hits

For completeness I'm adding Christen Unie with all dab options. gidonb (talk) 04:33, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Except that if you actually look at the front page hits for "christian union" party -wikipedia, not a single one of them refers to this political party. For "christian union" political party -wikipedia only one out of the ten does. So the fact that there are lots of hits for those terms doesn't prove they are the most common terms for this subject, only demonstrate that they are very ambiguous terms.

And anyway, this isn't a case of WP:COMMONNAME; it is a case of WP:DAB. I agree that "Christian Union" is the most common name in English; but it is also very ambiguous, so can't be used. "Christian Union (political party)" is not the most common name (or even a remotely common name - "Christian union (political party)" -wikipedia gives 772 hits, mostly about Slovakia); it is the most common name plus a parenthetical disambiguation term. WP:DAB says "When there is another term (such as Apartment instead of Flat) or more complete name (such as English language instead of English) that is unambiguous, commonly used in English (even without being the most common term), and equally clear, that term is typically the best to use." That is the case here - ChristenUnie, or Christen Unie, is unambiguous, clear, and used in English. Parenthetical disambiguation like "Christian Union (political party)" or "Christian Union (Netherlands)" is a less desirable option when no unambiguous term is available. TSP (talk) 12:13, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

TSP, glad we agree on the main phrase! As for the dab, WP:DAB at WP:NCDAB is very clear that Christian Union (political party) would be the desired name according to our guideline. Christian Union (Netherlands) is a discriminatory name in the framework of Christian Union. It proposes that if a political party is not in the English speaking region then suddenly only the location matters, nothing else. Well, not according to the WP guidelines and standards! gidonb (talk) 13:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As it happens I disagree on that too, but am not really arguing that. As far as I can tell WP:NCDAB clearly prefers ChristenUnie. Natural disambiguation that is unambiguous, commonly used, and clear is generally preferable to parenthetical disambiguation; for instance mechanical fan and hand fan are used instead of fan (mechanical) and fan (implement). If no unambiguous, commonly used, and clear natural disambiguation is available, another type of disambiguation is used. If there are several possible choices for parenthetical disambiguation, use the same disambiguating phrase already commonly used for other topics within the same class and context, if any. Otherwise, choose whichever is simpler. For example, use "(mythology)" rather than "(mythological figure)."

So firstly, choosing an alternative term, like ChristenUnie, seems to be marked as clearly preferable to parenthetical disambiguation. Secondly, if there is no alternative available, the standard for picking a parenthetical is consistency followed by simplicity, not whether a term is discriminatory. Labour Party and Conservative Party, for example, show that a parenthetical country is very frequently used for party names. TSP (talk) 13:53, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How would you feel about ChistianUnion? I'm asking not because I'm a fan of Dutchisms but because ChristenUnie or Christen Unie is usually translated into Christian Union that needs dabbing or ChristianUnion that doesn't. gidonb (talk) 14:06, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Notification of discussion involving this article

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/Political parties regarding the inclusion of the party flag in the infobox of this article. The thread is Party flags in infoboxes. Thank you. — Ætoms ^[talk] 23:54, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Advertisement