Talk:Leefbaar

Based on what I read on Talk:2006_Dutch_municipal_election#seat_lossI wanted to write the following:

In The Hague, [[Leefbaar Den Haag] was registered by some people who never had any political aspirations, including a homeless man. They never campaigned, but put up posters and got four seats during the 2002 Dutch municipal elections, based on the name. They spent most of their allocated party budget on a car.

But now I've found this site. So now I'm not sure. Has a serious party taken over the name? DirkvdM 07:57, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Leefbaar Den Haag story does have a factual basis: "He thought it might be a good idea to let Sinterklaas live permanently in The Hague. It would be good for the image of the city, Dufresne argued. The people of the Hague could put their shoes at the chimney all year long and apart from that 'travelling by steamer is time-consuming and bad for the environment.'" [1] David Sneek 10:20, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some one reverted my incorporating of this text into the Politics of the Netherlands (terminology) article. I think the information on this article is best suited on the politics of the Netherlands article: it is specifically dutch, it is political, and I think it can never be more than a short article/stub. BTW I am reverting the edit, but only to a typographically superior one. --C mon 09:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the information on this article is best suited on the politics of the Netherlands article: it is specifically dutch, it is political, and I think it can never be more than a short article/stub. --C mon 16:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the article, as is, is to short and could be merged. However, I think this article does have a lot of growth potential; there can be subsections about the different branches (for instance the Rotterdam branch and the national branch), more information about Pim Fortuyn rising in its ranks and his sub sequential break etc.

To be honest I am no Leefbaar expert, so I am not the person to enhance this article, but there might be others.

There for I am against the merger, but that is my opinion. Mach10 18:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Three points:

First, there is already plenty of discussion of Leefbaar Rotterdam, Leefbaar Nederland and Pim Fortuyn. I think better discussion is needed on those pages instead of repeating it here.

Second, when a "Leefbaar"-expert comes along and wants to write such an article he still can, the data here will not be deleted, but the page will merely be made into a redirect (without deleting the page's history)

Third and most important, I don't see such an expert, I think, until He comes along we might as well make this page a redirect. -- C mon 22:44, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of merging Leefbaar in to Politics of the Netherlands (terminology), we could also merge Leefbaar Rotterdam and Leefbaar Nederland in to this article. Just a thought Mach10 00:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A good idea, but I think prominent parties, such as LN deserve separate pages, because they are separate entitites. LN is in my to do list. I think we have debated this enough can you live with a redirect? --C mon 07:19, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oke, I can live with it, I will not do it yet, because I don't have time now to check if everything that is on here is coverd on the Politics in the Netherlands place, but you are free to do so Mach10 10:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]