Talk:Integration law for immigrants to the Netherlands

Wording, style and neutrality
The article is too personal. It is based on too many personal feelings, certainly POV. To help the case of immigrants in Holland, it is better to write the criticism in a NPOV manner with good references, --C6H12O6 14:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The article voices popular criticisms and complaints that, if I remember it well, have also been voiced in Dutch media. I admit that the article may not be neutral, but I do not think it is based merely on personal feelings. Andries 06:22, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have removed the term "assimilation" from the article, because I think it makes a POV caricature of the law. Please only re-insert the term with citations to reputable sources. I think the article makes a lot of criticism of the law, but it does not attempt to give an explanation of why this law came into existence. There are quite a lot of foreigners here who lived more than 10 years in the Netherlands, but cannot find a job, partially because they never bothered to learn Dutch. Andries 06:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I propose the title Integration law for new immigrants to the Netherlands. Andries 07:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I changed the title because I had overlooked that the law does not only apply to new immigrants. Andries (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

People are not helped to integrate but forced to do so. High fines are given when you do not cooperate. Andries (talk) 09:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

This is a terrible article. No NPOV whatsoever. The point of Wikipedia is not to "help the case of immigrants to Holland" any more than it is to "help the case of rascists in Holland". Wikipedia is an online encyclodedia, available to immigrants and anti-immigration advocates alike. I will contact a Dutch editor and ask him to rewrite this article. -Ribbit 10:28, 03 December 2008

Since we all seem to agree that this article was no good, I've rewritten it completely. I have added a paragraph of criticism on this law as well, hoping to keep the best of all worlds. You can comment on the talk page, which I will try to check regularly in the next month. A lot of the info used is from the Dutch version of this article. --here@llyis@dj (talk) 17:32, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi all. Can I remove the tab from the main page? O, and moreover, what do you think of "language and integration obligations for immigrants to the Netherlands" as a title?--here@llyis@dj (talk) 15:03, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the word "law" should be in the title. Andries (talk) 20:29, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Controversy section
Wow, this is an opinionated mess. I added a "More citations needed" tag... I sure hope it gets them. --tgeller (talk) 19:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I just went through and tried to add appropriate "Citation needed"s and such. But honestly, it's so bad that I'd recommend entirely deleting what's there. I'm not a regular WPian, so I'll leave that judgment to someone who is. --tgeller (talk) 20:00, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * More than two years have passed. It has been long past the time to delete the unsourced claims. Wikipedia should not contain large unsourced texts at all.92.63.48.182 (talk) 22:13, 10 July 2023 (UTC)