Talk:European Netherlands

Scope

How can this possibly evolve to be anything more than a simple duplication of Netherlands? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 23:18, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

By focussing on the history and use of the term (mainly legal and international law) and the specifics of the area. In my opinion it is a welcome article on an important subject, but no need for something very lenghty. L.tak (talk) 12:54, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Is there enough information out there on the use of the term? I don't see much in this article. The first source uses the term once in its title, with simply Netherlands for the rest. The second defines the use of the term "European territories" in law. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 13:09, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposed merge into Netherlands (or simply delete)

I see no evidence of this term being used in its own right. It seems a natural reaction to the use of the "Caribbean Netherlands", but I think that although the that term is useful, this article isn't describing anything other than what people consider to be "the Netherlands". There's no room for expansion without simply duplicating the Netherlands article (as has been noted), and again there's no evidence of the term being used in any meaningful sense. I think a case needs to be put forward on why this article is needed and justified. -- Hazhk ^{Talk to me} 19:55, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

There are several terms used (Netherlands, European territory) being the most used one I guess; but as a jurisdiction it exists, with clear implications in (international) law. That doesn't mean we need to repeat the Netherlands article, but just indicate where it is relevant (in law, and to some extent in sports); similar to Metropolitan France. The article is at the moment a bit of a stub, and I will expand a bit in the next weeks... L.tak (talk) 10:32, 21 February 2013 (UTC)