Talk:Capital of the Netherlands

Seat of government / capital difference

@Benin: the same goes for South Africa (Pretoria/Johannesburg), Bolivia (Sucre/La Paz), Chile (Santiago/Valparaíso) and Côte d'Ivoire (Yamoussoukro/Abidjan), doesn't it? Sixtus 19:39, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

South Africa has three capitals, and each one is home to a different branch of the government. Cape Town legislature, Bloemfontein judiciary, and Pretoria executive. — User:ACupOfCoffee@ 18:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I created a separate section to deal with the issue. Question is whether it is in the right place in this article. Also, are there more examples of capitals without government than the five now listed. Michel Doortmont (talk) 13:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I can only see three examples listed now - not five. There is an article titled "Capital (political)" which lists many examples under section "Unorthodox capital city arrangements" and another article titled "List of countries with multiple capitals". Do there need to be so many repetitions? Tiddy (talk) 05:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

What does it mean to be a Capital?

So ... I'm left wondering what it means to be a "Capital City" of a country, if the government is located elsewhere. Is there any additional meaning in calling Amsterdam the Capital, or is it just a (practically) meaningless designation? -- 23:06, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Its the constitutional designation: a symbol. Furthermore coronations and royal marriages are held here. C mon 23:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

A symbol for what? 122.105.217.71 (talk) 04:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

For the country, just like a flag is a symbol. – gpvos (talk) 15:56, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Historian Andreas Daum has shown that the term "capital" can have multiple meanings:

-"Economic" - obvious meaning, certainly applies to Amsterdam

-"Statuary" - the city that the country legally designates "capital", such as the case of Amsterdam

-"Political" - where the government resides

I have tried to improve this article by including such nuances in the English term, "capital"; however, other editors have labeled my edits as OR and reversed. I fail to see how my good-faith edits are not an improvement; without them (as the article currently stands), it reflects only one of Daum's several definitions of a capital, and thus the article is skewed and incomplete. Daum doesn't seem to express a preference for one sense over another, although he does state that most "capital" cities in the world are political capitals.Narc (talk) 16:34, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Nobody disagrees that Amsterdam as capital is odd as it is not the political capital of the Netherlands. Actually this is mentioned here, at the the Hague article (implicitly) at the Amsterdam and the Netherlands articles and once again explicitly at Capital_city#Unusual_capital_city_arrangements.

And indeed nobody does disagree about its statuary status and most would agree about its economic status (probably not people from Rotterdam who argue that as major trade and industrial city Rotterdam is actually economically more important than Amsterdam - but than again, Washington DC is economically less important compared to New York).

While Daum in general does not claim any preference of one definition over any other in general, for specific countries, one specific definition (or combination thereof) is often preferred. Following your argument into the absurd, you would be as much justified in demanding changes to the Washington, D.C. article (not the economic capital of the US, hence not necessarily to be recognised as the capital of the US), as to any of the articles related to the Netherlands capital.

Put very simply, as no definition has a general preference, the local preference should be leading. In the absence of reliable sources explicitly claiming any other capital of the Netherlands other than Amsterdam (for which the constitution of the Netherlands is the source as well as several other we can easily find), there is no reason whatsoever to doubt that status. Arnoutf (talk) 18:41, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that there is a reductio ad absurdum here. Washington may indeed be accurately called the "political capital" of the US. The problem is that (a) this article is completely unsourced and (b) the wiki article on Capital_city defines capital as political only. What is the justification for having this article? I don't see a separate article for Capital_of_France or other countries....Presumably due to the unusual fact that the "statutory" capital is different from the de facto political capital. But if this is the justification for the article, this should be stated, and would make the article more interesting. Otherwise I propose that it be deleted.Narc (talk) 06:06, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, once you have convinced Wikipedia to rename Washington DC to political capital come back here.

Re (a) There are 2 sources, one of which is the very reliable primary source: the Dutch constitution. Completely unsourced is thus clearly not true.

Re (b) Wikipedia is not a reliable source (according to its own guidelines), so we cannot use the Wikipedia article capital city (and in any case the Dutch situation is explained there). Also - the Dutch situation is odd indeed, and for that reason additional background information on that oddity is considered sufficiently notable to warrant a separate article. The capital situation of France is not notably different from that of most countries.

I have the feeling that your arguments follow a logic that says (1) The status of the capital of the Netherlands does not neatly fit the definitions (we agree on this) (2) Agreed upon definitions should capture the world (3) Therefore, we should communicate the status of all capital cities fitting with agrred upon definitions. (4) If there are clear sources from the real worlds claiming the opposite to the definition (Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands - and no sources claim anything else) these are of lower importance compared to maintaining the agreed definition from (2) [this step is synthesis and original research].

In my view the world is infinitely more complex and interesting than ever can be captured in tight definitions. If the world and the definitions don't match. we either have to rephrase the definition, or have to live with somewhat ill-defined terms. (The only alternative, reinterpreting the world to make it fit definitions is not something we should want). Arnoutf (talk) 06:29, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad you mentioned DC, it's a good example. The article on DC, like the article on Paris, and hundreds of others, starts with, "City X is the capital of ____". There is a standard here. Obviously, adding the word "political" to DC is unnecessary because everyone knows that the unqualified word "capital" means political. We don't have to have a RS for the meaning of every word - hey, what's a "word"? What is the meaning of "meaning"? ad absurdum. Yet you declare, "as no definition has a general preference, the local preference should be leading". No, I don't think so. I think that this may be true on the Dutch wikipedia. But the English wikipedia should give precedence to the standard usage of English words. For all we know, Dutch has two different words for "capital", one being political and the other meaning "prominent", and this nuance is lost in translation. (this is what I mean by unsourced - we have no sources that this article is justified here. So to the point: if the justification for this _English language_ article is as you say, then that particular quirkiness should be explicit in the article, no? Otherwise, it is not clear why there is a "Capital of the Netherlands" article but no "Capital of the US" article etc. (PS did you read the thread following this one?)Narc (talk) 16:25, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

The issue of describing Washington DC as the capital of the US is an uncomplicated one. Hence, an article Capital of the USA would be so short that it wouldn't warrant a separate article. In contrast, the capital of the Netherlands issue is a complicated one. Hence this article. We can't pretend that everything in the world is equally simple and can be dealt with in the same way. --Frederico1234 (talk) 18:06, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

@Narc, you used Daum as a source for what a capital is, and said yourself that Daum does not choose a definition. Now you suddenly and unsourced choose for political capital as the only relevant definition; and say that the argument that no defintion has prominence comes from me???????

Indeed the situation is somewhat uncommon, which makes it complicated, which warrants a separate article. Very consistent with what I wrote in the thread following this one 5 years ago.

Let's make it a plain and simple challenge. Provide a reliable source that explicitly claims that the Hague is the capital of the Netherlands (or makes the explicit statement that Amsterdam is not - for what it's worth CIA factbook lists Amsterdam as capital [1]). Only after such a reliable source is provided we have any reason to discuss anything further on this topic. Arnoutf (talk) 12:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Merge this page?

Why not move "Capital of the Netherlands" to either Amsterdam or the Netherlands? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Magbatz (talk • contribs)

It is too lengthy for the Netherlands article, and in the light of the The Hague, A'dam controversy not well suited for A'dam alone. Arnoutf 14:36, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I concur with Arnoutf: I don't this article can be merged into something elseC mon 15:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I also agree with Arnoutf. I think that it's quite unusual to have the seat of Government located outside of the capital - so it deserves a separate article, especially bearing in mind the amount of content. DrFrench 15:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I added more content still and some pictures. This is definitely a separate article. Michel Doortmont (talk) 10:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

coordinates needed?

Do we really need the coordinates of Amsterdam here? This article is about the constitutional institute capital, not necessarily about the geographical location of the city (e.g. the Supreme Court of the Netherlands another political institution has no coordinates either). Arnoutf (talk) 20:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I've removed them. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 12:54, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Consitution

The article says that the Dutch consitutions since 1815 included an article in which Amsterdam is defined as capital. This is not true: the constitution of 1814 included the fact that "The King would be inaugurated in Amsterdam as capital." The following constitutions from 1815 untill 1983 didn't included anything about this matter. The 1983 version states that the King is inaugurated in "the capital Amsterdam". Mijnnaamgaatunietaan (talk) 00:53, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Just read the Dutch page, it is true. Dqfn13 (talk) 12:13, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

That's what I did... Maybe you should do yourself ;) Mijnnaamgaatunietaan (talk) 14:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Read is the past in this case... Next time I'll write it in Dutch... as that's both our mother tongue guessing by your name. Dqfn13 (talk) 19:17, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Capitals of the Netherlands and similar redirects

Redirects Capitals of the Netherlands, Capital of Holland, Capitals of Holland and a couple of similar ones have been nominated for discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 May 20#Capitals of the Netherlands to determine the best target(s). You are invited to contribute to the discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 23:31, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Is this a joke?

" To accommodate the king, the grand seventeenth-century Town Hall of Amsterdam, prime example of the republican values that were prevalent for so long in the Netherlands, was converted into a Royal Palace." Obviously this is not an example of republican values and has nothing to do with either republicanism or a republic. Should we remove this "joke"? Friscoan (talk) 23:50, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Well, actually in the Netherlands most people do see the former town hall as example of the Republican values, as severall sculptures show the equality of the citizens of the Republic. Dqfn13 (talk) 11:53, 26 April 2018 (UTC)