Talk:Elections in the Netherlands

Untitled
I just wrote 'assigning people to seats' (based on 'Hoe wij kiezen' by Maurice de Hond). My father used to say that a vote for anyone but the 'lijsttrekker' is a lost vote, but this doesn't seem to support that. Is this a myth and what is it based on then? DirkvdM 12:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Het is een mythe. Ik denk dat de achtergrond is dat het vrijwel onmogelijk was om met voorkeurstemmen in de kamer te komen. Electionworld 20:24, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

New table
I want start a new table for the election results overview because several parties have disappeared and appeared and changed in size. I'm not sure about the order, though. It should reflect the expected future size of parties but not be too different form the previous tables, so I suggest keeping the order of the biggest parties. The order I suggest is PvdA - VVD - CDA - SP - GroenLinks - PvdD - ChristenUnie - SGP - PvdV - EenNL. Another option would be to give a better grouping of similar parties bij changing the first parties to CDA - VVD - PvdA, placing the latter alongside the other left wing parties. DirkvdM 20:46, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Election statistics for non-Nederlanderphones
Could someone advise me whether the figures viewabkle here are for this election, and whether they are complete / final? If they are not for this election, could someone direct me to the correct page within that website? Thanks. Adam 14:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Probably the contents of that site are different now than two years ago, but currently you can find the final parliament election results there: click on 'Tweede Kamer' in the left-hand column, select the year under 'jaartal', and click the 'Toon resultaten' button. I assume the numbers are complete/final, since they're published by the Kiesraad, the official elections body. Probably when there are new elections, and it's just after they were held, they might be tentative. The last elections were on 22 November 2006, and the final results were published on the 27th. Mtcv (talk) 14:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

closed list, right?
is the system one of closed list, or open list proportionality?Aryah (talk) 16:18, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It's open-list proportionality, as the voter has some choice in who gets elected: if a candidate receives 25% of the seat threshold, s/he is automatically elected, even if the candidate's place on the list is too low to be elected based on the number of seats that the party gets. See also here. Mtcv (talk) 18:53, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

national election systems for the EU parliament election - help wanted!
I am currently working on the national election systems for the EU parliament election, in form of a table. Your help is welcome, especially if you speak Dutch (I use the laws in foreign languages as references) C-Kobold (talk) 15:03, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Table of election results and cabinets
Dajasj removed the table at the bottom of the article without discussion. I put it back. Yes, there are other tables, but this one is completely different. I agree that this is an odd place to put it, but I wouldn't know where else to put it. It has already been discussed when the template it was in first was removed, to make it a permanent part of this article. Now I wouldn't mind if it were moved elsewhere, but I believe it should be somewhere because it gives a much better and more complete overview than other tables, of both election results and cabinets. DirkvdM (talk) 08:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Okay, so the difference is that it combines the seat distribution and the cabinets, while others seperate these two? Dajasj (talk) 09:09, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is the main thing. it combines (the numerical aspects of) the tables for Seat distribution and Cabinets. But it also gives a better overview. In part because of the ordering of the parties (in 2 or 3 sections), when compared with the seat distribution list. And compared with the cabinets list it is much more compact. And it shows very clearly how cabinets shifted over the years, simply by putting those seat numbers in bold. And it shows more detail, such as if a party participated in the elections in a given year.
 * I myself use this table a lot to analyse the development over the years. The other two lists are frankly quite useless for that purpose. DirkvdM (talk) 09:09, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, I get that. We shouldnt however have a table for every need in my opinion. And more importantly, is this page a suitable place for it? Shouldnt it be split off? Dajasj (talk) 09:34, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I do agree btw that the historic composition page can be improved, for example by switching columns and rows.
 * I was wondering why months in office is really relevant btw in this table? Dajasj (talk) 09:40, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I would recommend merging this with the Historic Composition page, the more I think about it. Because this page is about elections in general, not specifically the House since 1945. Dajasj (talk) 09:52, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I tried to put as much information as possible into the table. The term is just an narrow column, so why not add it? Note that the purpose of the table was not to put it in this article (one reason I started it as a separate template), but this is where it ended up. One could also turn the question around. Where should it go? Or should it be a separate article? Putting it in the Historic Composition article is also possible. But then it would have to be expanded to include the years before te war, and at the moment I don't have the time to do this.
 * I am not a fan of switching columns and rows (apart from the fact that that would even be more work). Putting time on the horizontal 'axis' would indeed be more in keeping with how things are often presented (but by no means always), but it would still have to be split (as is also done with the table there), and then the continuity would be lost. The way I built this table, the way PvdA developed for example, is very easy to follow, because it is very much like one column, despite the splits. Other parties are shifted to some degree, but for most it is easy to follow (although I put GroenLinks too far to the right in the last sub-table). Also, this makes it easier to add text for events in certain years. For example the expansion to 150 seats. In the other table, that is indicated with a vertical bold line, which confused even me at first until I noticed the year (others might have to notice the number of seats in the last row). Adding an explanation would be more complicated there. DirkvdM (talk) 08:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC)