Talk:Rotterdam

This article contains content imported from the English Wikipedia article on Rotterdam. View the page revision history for a list of the authors.

Smoking

the section on smoking seems largely juvenile and at times misleading. It is not legal to smoke (or posess) cannabis in the Netherlands, merely tolerated. his should be cleared up.

Please plunge forward and make the changes as you see fit in future. -- (WT-en) Tim (writeme!) 12:55, 6 June 2007 (EDT)

I agree with the anon comment above. I've removed the line section;

Let's be honest, most people (especially youngsters from the UK, USA and Canada) don't go to the Netherlands for its fine architecture or the historical value, no matter what they tell their parents.

I haven't attempted to fix the rest of the section because I have been to Rotterdam (yet) and I have no interest/idea about this stuff anyway.(WT-en) Teiresias84 05:00, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Hello. Sorry for contributing as anon. However, it's a common misconception that it's "just tolerated" to smoke cannabis. Although officially named "active tolerance", in practice this means full and unquestionable decriminalization. The reason why it is not legal is mostly because the Netherlands is required to adhere to international (and European) treaties that prevent this. Wikipedia also says that "international pressure" has something to do with it, although I am personally skeptical about that.

No matter what way you look at it, you might mention that cannabis is "illegal by the book", but it would be skewed to say that it's "merely tolerated". Saying that makes me think of a disgruntled police officer who yearns for the day he is finally allowed to nab those annoying drug tourists; cannabis is fully integrated into society by now and accepted as fact of life. It's comparable to gay marriage; no church is required to bless these marriages, but in practice most of them do; in this case, it would also be skewed to say "exclusively the government is obliged to marry gay couples", which, although true, does not convey the true stance of the public on the issue. Hope this helps clear up some things. 195.241.69.171 16:42, 21 October 2008 (EDT)

Hotels

I removed the following entry, since the address is in Spijkenisse and not in Rotterdam.

• <sleep name="Carlton Oasis Hotel" address="Curieweg 1 3208KJ Spijkenisse" phone="+31 (0)181-625222" KJ Spijkenisse+31(0)181-625222 email="info@oasis.carlton.nl" fax="+31(0)181-611094" checkin="" checkout="" price="" url="http://www.carlton.nl/oasis/default-en.html"></sleep>Carlton Oasis is a luxury hotel located between Rotterdam and Zeeland.

--(WT-en) WallyTheWalrus 09:44, 20 September 2009 (EDT)

Thanks, I added it to Spijkenisse as its first listing. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 13:02, 18 January 2010 (EST)

Districts of Rotterdam

I think Rotterdam's article now is big enough for it to be districtified. The problem is that I am not really well-known in this city.. Could anyone who is more familiar with Rotterdam draw up a districts scheme? --(WT-en) globe-trotter 13:10, 18 January 2010 (EST)

I agree. The City Map at http://www.scribd.com/full/17031198?access_key=key-wrkogz2j7ssbaxfrsde (found the link on [1]) has districts, however these seem to be small to me to provide district pages with enough info. I'll think about this and will post a suggestion soon. --(WT-en) WallyTheWalrus 06:20, 6 February 2010 (EST)

Suggestion:

• Rotterdam-Centrum = between 's Gravendijkwal, Goudsesingel, Oostplein, railwayline and Nieuwe Maas river plus Kop van Zuid on the South Bank.
• Rotterdam-West = between Schiedam, 's Gravendijkwal, railwayline and Nieuwe Maas river. This includes deelgemeenten Delfshaven and a part of Centrum (between Heemraadssingel and 's Gravendijkwal) (note that the Dutch Wikipedia takes the Westersingel as the eastern boundary of Rotterdam-West)
• Rotterdam-Noord (North): deelgemeenten Noord, Hillegersberg-Schiebroek, Overschie
• Rotterdam-Oost (East): deelgemeenten Kralingen-Crooswijk, Prins Alexander
• Rotterdam-Zuid (South): all of the Rotterdam municipality south of the Nieuwe Maas river (deelgemeenten Charlois, IJsselmonde, Feijenoord (and Hoogvliet). Excluding Kop van Zuid (is part of Centrum)

Discussion: Pernis, Rozenburg (from march 2010) and Hoek van Holland: these are all municipality Rotterdam. Pernis and Rozenburg could be added to Rotterdam-Zuid. Hoek van Holland as a separate district?

--(WT-en) WallyTheWalrus 09:23, 6 February 2010 (EST)

Interesting suggestions. I think most tourist activity will be in the city center though. So we might want to split up the center, otherwise we'll get 1 full district and 4 pretty much empty ones. I like the map of the VVV Tourist Authority as a regional subdivision, but these seem not to correspond with the official neighborhoods of Rotterdam Centrum? --(WT-en) globe-trotter 09:45, 6 February 2010 (EST)

the tourist map is indeed not 100% accurate in terms of official neighborhoods. I would stick with the Rotterdam-Centrum district for the time being. Splitting up further in subdistricts gives small listings due to the small size of these subdistricts. In terms of my other suggestions: the guideline is pretty clear on the matter [2]: make districts when there is enough information to fill. --(WT-en) WallyTheWalrus 11:24, 7 February 2010 (EST)

I made a (simple) map to illustrate the districts you have proposed. Are they correctly displayed this way? About Hook of Holland, I think maybe it should also be a separate district of Rotterdam, as Rotterdam/Hook of Holland. But could it contain enough content for a district? Or maybe it should be included in South? (though that feels a bit weird I think). --(WT-en) globe-trotter 19:12, 10 February 2010 (EST)

Good work. Hoek van Holland could be covered in the main article as it is covered at this moment (under beach). It probably won't contain enough information for a district page. Regarding your map: it is a very large area including Pernis, Rozenburg and the harbor area around these places which are all most likely not interesting for tourists. I would not show that part on the map. The boundaries of the proposed districts seem to be correct. --(WT-en) WallyTheWalrus 17:15, 11 February 2010 (EST)

Do/Nightlife

I think the Nightlife section (under Do) need some work. Bars and clubs should be listed under drink. The general information about the different area's could be added to the drink section, by creating subheadings under Drink for each category. --(WT-en) WallyTheWalrus 18:13, 10 February 2010 (EST)

Fly to Rotterdam if possible

You might have a better deal if you fly to Amsterdam Schiphol Airport the article says. Why? If Rotterdam is your final destination, its always quicker to fly to Rotterdam if possible from where you start. The handling is so much quicker. In 10 - 20 minutes after landing you are outside to take the bus or a taxi. And this way it's much cheaper to reach the centre of Rotterdam. (WT-en) Salix2 12:40, 21 November 2010 (EST)

Districts the second

It's been eight years since the past discussion died down. Rotterdam is large enough to where districtification would be useful to the traveller. I have therefore made a proposal of how to divide the city as well as the cities around Rotterdam, as can be seen in the image to the right. In shades of green are cities that would be in the Rijnmond or Greater Rotterdam region, bluish regions would be districts of Rotterdam. These consist of:

• Rijnmond: Hoek van Holland, Maassluis, Vlaardingen, Schiedam, Spijkenisse, Hoogvliet (or Portugaal), Barendrecht, Capelle aan den IJssel, Krimpen aan de Lek.

Hoogvliet is technically a suburb of Rotterdam and may instead be listed as a subdivision of that, adding all of Europort east of the Oude Maas (easternmost river crossing through Europort).

Barendrecht can be chosen to be left out, and made part of Alblasserwaard-Drechtsteden instead.

Hoek van Holland is, as a matter of fact, part of the municipality of Rotterdam, but may as well be not included as a district as it is connected to the city centre only via the Metro network. Before being incorporated into the municipality, Hoek only bordered Europort, which for practical usage could just as well be ignored, as no bridges span the river aside from a ferry at Maassluis.

• Rotterdam: Europort (or Havens), Zuid, Feyenoord, Centrum, West, Noord, Oost. Of these, Europort would be the largest by a long shot. Take in mind though, that most of Europort may just as well be considered wasteland, as the harbour and its industry are rarely interesting for the traveller. Instead, this district would list Rozenburg, Pernis, and the other towns gobbled up by Rotterdam.

Now, I am not that familiar with Rotterdam, so I am more than welcome to your thoughts on the matter.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 16:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

This article is still on a list of articles with active district discussions. Given the length of the article, it might be a good idea to renew this discussion, if anyone is interested (and I won't be able to help because I haven't visited Rotterdam), but otherwise, is there a point to keeping it in Category:Articles with districts discussion? Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:13, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Wauteurz has some districts of Rotterdam in their userspace and the talk of the districts recently came up in the star nom for this, so I'd say keep it. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:16, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Wauteurz, would you like to put your proposal into effect? About how many listings would you anticipate there being in each district? Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek, SHB2000: My districts in this discussion aren't the districts I ended up using for the articles in my user namespace (shown on dynamic map), though they are largely similar. The main differences being:

• Exclusion of already established articles: Hoek van Holland, Maassluis, Vlaardingen, Schiedam, Spijkenisse, Albrandswaard (Hoogvliet/Portugaal). These may later be grouped under a "Rijnmond" region, which has been merged into the giant and unwieldy Rotterdam-The Hague Metropolitan Region, which shouldn't exist by 7+2 standards and also contains two cities that could be districtified at some point (Rotterdam and The Hague).
• Exclusion of other established places without an integration into Rotterdam proper (Barendrecht, Krimpen a/d Lek).
• "Noord" now also contains Kralingen (was "Oost"), "Oost" and "Kapelle" have been merged

The reason I bring this up, is because I wonder whether this would require a new discussion to be started, or whether mentioning it here suffices. I've not started a discussion for this version, since I wanted it largely done before pushing anything forward, as my previous attempts yielded little response.

To answer your questions: I would like to see my latest version of this proposal to be put into effect (the one that this discussion is for is impractical because links between parts of a district were lacking or blocked by highways or other infrastructure, this making the pairing unlogical). As for listings, this is the current overview:

District	Status	See	Do	Buy	Eat	Drink	Sleep
Centre (or Stadsdriehoek)	Work in progress	29	?	?	8 areas	?	?
Delfshaven	Essentials complete (no Drink, Go next)	7	1	2 areas	4 areas	?	3
Kralingen/Blijdorp	Largely done	9	2	?	?	?	7
Feijenoord	Largely done	2	2	1	?	?	7
North or Overschie	Work in progress	6	2 sites, 3 listings	?	?	?	?
Port of Rotterdam or Harbours	Complete (minus Drink)	8 (4 of which are boat-spotting points)	3	2 areas	6	?	6 + 2 suggestions

In general, I think about 5 see listings and 2 do listings can be expected; ~5 eat and sleep listings, and at least one buy. For Centrum, you can pretty much look at Rotterdam as it sits today. Most listings are within the city centre, if not also Kralingen/Blijdorp or Feijenoord. I can't wrap up the districts before the end of the month, but I can make a push next month to get them completed. The three remaining districts can always be filled in at a later date, but that way the districts can be rolled out sooner rather than later. -- Wauteurz (talk) 15:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Wauteurz, thanks very much for your response and your ongoing work. My feeling is that you don't need to start a new thread to discuss this districting scheme. If you think any part of your proposal might be controversial, I'd suggest waiting several days or at most a week to see if it gets any pushback; otherwise, feel free to go live with it as soon as two days from now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek: I'm currently wrapping up a semester, and I doubt I'll make any progress on districts before the end of this month, so give it a week at least before I'll make any changes to Rotterdam as it stands. For the Rijnmond-idea I mentioned, I doubt I'll do much before this summer, and when I do, I will first start a discussion about that when the time comes. If anyone is up for something to do though, feel free to help fill out the districts I linked above, or start any of the missing ones. They might be in my userspace now, but that doesn't mean they can or should only be edited by me.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 19:46, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

No rush. If I'm reading correctly, you're proposing to create a Rijnmond subregion under Rotterdam-The Hague Metropolitan Region and breadcrumbing Hoek van Holland, Maassluis, Vlaardingen, Schiedam, Spijkenisse and Albrandswaard to it. Is it that simple? If it is, anyone could get that process started by simply creating a Rijnmond article as a region article and leaving most of the contents for you or someone else to fill in later. Maps would have to be updated, but is there any other complication? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

I think I didn't phrase my vision for the Metropolitan Region correctly then: I want to undo the merger between Rijnmond (Rhine Estuary) and Haaglanden (Greater The Hague). You can still see how this looked before the merger, as the regionmap for South-Holland never got updated. There is an argument to be made for splitting it in three, with Delfland (Greater Delft) between Rijnmond and Haaglanden, but I don't deem that necessary as Delfland wouldn't be a big region at all. My reasons for wanting to undo the merger between Rijnmond and Haaglanden:

• The area is massive, and contains three large cities, all with their separate identities.
• The region is based on a diplomatic cooperation that municipalities in this region have. Aside from bureaucracy, there is little to tie them together.
• The region currently has 13 destinations in its category, and excludes about as many that have not yet been created.
• Consensus was never given nor requested for the merger. That doesn't make it unjustified, but no real reason was given either. I suspect it's because of the Metropolitan Region being formed in 2015 that the change was made, but I can only guess.

In time, The Hague might be worth districtifying also, which would make Scheveningen a district of The Hague, as it is in real life. I don't plan on doing that at this stage though. Perhaps in another few years.

In any case, Rijnmond would consist of the following municipalities:

• Rotterdam (with its six, eventually nine districts)
• In the west: Hoek van Holland (in reality part of Rotterdam, but an exclave for all practical purposes), Maassluis, Vlaardingen, Schiedam
• In the north: Lansingerland (may also go to Haaglanden)
• In the south: Barendrecht, Ridderkerk.

(Here's a map of municipalities in South Holland if anyone needs it.)

Krimpen aan de Lek can be included, as could Spijkenisse, but they are currently parts of Groene Hart and Zuid-Hollandse Eilanden respectively, and I have no real motive to change that. It is already a sizeable change, so I feel like consensus is kind of mandatory here.

Haaglanden would consist of The Hague, Wassenaar, Leidschendam-Voorburg, Pijnacker-Nootdorp, Rijswijk, Delft, Westland and Midden-Delfland, possibly with or without Lansingerland. Scheveningen is also in this region, but is technically a suburb of the Hague, though our hierarchy treats it as its own entity. I hope this actually clarifies my vision and isn't just another one of my walls of text.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 21:45, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

The proposal looks good to me SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Wauteurz, great work on the districts. I think they are quite good balanced in size and (potential) number of listings and als make logical area's for tourists to match the mental map. I would use the name 'Northern Rotterdam' instead of Overschie since also Hillegersberg and Schiebroek are covered in that district article. Also, North might give confusion with the actual Borough of Rotterdam Noord which is covered under Kralingen. The official Rotterdam tourist map uses Rotterdam North for Noord See PDF of tourist map. Instead of Kralingen, the district name could be Kralingen-Crooswijk which is also the area of the local council, or even Noord and Kralingen-Crooswijk. The name Blijdorp is a subdistrict within the borough of Noord, I would not use that as a district name. --WallyTheWalrus (talk) 09:15, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I've moved the six districts in development into mainspace today, going mostly with the suggested name changes made above by Wally. I'm not entirely sure how to convert the current listings in the city article into effective and interesting blurbs, so a bit of help with that would be very much appreciated.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 15:38, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for putting this into effect @Wauteurz. I would like to help with moving listings, however at first it seems that listings are already moved/copied to the district pages, but I also noted differences between some of the 'old' listings which are still on the main page and the listings on the district page. Is this on purpose, am I missing something? I want to prevent double work or other misunderstandings. WallyTheWalrus (talk) 13:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@WallyTheWalrus: No worries! I copied most of the listings that fit into a district already, but I've done so over the span of half a year or more. The differences come from me expanding upon some listings for the district articles, and some other changes might be at the hands of other editors that have edited Rotterdam over the past half year or so.

In summary, what needs to be done right now, is to rewrite the city article to include a lot less listings. Some listings might not yet fit into a district yet, as not all district articles are created already, so just leave those on the city article for now. There might be some listings in sections like Drink that I haven't yet moved over, but for the most part it's just a just matter of rewriting and linking to the listings in the district articles where necessary.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 14:17, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Nominate article to Star or need cleanup?

It has been three years since it is not written on this site! And that is the reason to start this topic.Wikivoyagers, this needs new cleanup. Go now to this page and make the last changes to this article! We can help each other and nominate this article for star! DhrGabriel (talk) 16:51, 19 October 2021 (UTC) P.S click on my talk page and leave a message! I am very happy when i recieve positive messages! DhrGabriel (talk) 16:51, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

What? I'm confused on what you mean. Particularly "P.S click on my talk page and leave a message! I am very happy when i recieve positive messages!" SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:15, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

star nom

Rotterdam

In my opinion, this article is ready for star nomination, and if yes, it would be our second Benelux star. If we work hard on this article, i can nominate it and make this article a star! But one thing is remaining:Cleanup. Can a adminstrator do that cleanup? Also, i want to share a link: talk:Rotterdam and be sure to see the article:Rotterdam. DhrGabriel (talk) 17:27, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Drink lacks coords Tai123.123 (talk) 17:31, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Not yet. Drink section needs coordinates, which is needed for a guide article. Large cleanups for dead links needed hence this is not even a guide article. Listings not in alphabetical order. Some spelling fixes also needed. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:38, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Not yet It needs some updates, and some of the text is not in the normal style. AlasdairW (talk) 22:41, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Unless someone quickly makes this a guide article, this article isn't eligible for star since coords are needed to make this guide. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:53, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

While lat/longs are quite quickly added, I'd still not support starring Rotterdam yet. A lot of listings are just within the city centre, and to a lesser extend in Delfshaven and Kralingen. The south banks of the Meuse on the other hand are completely under-represented. If Rotterdam were to get a star, I'd argue that the city centre should be starred, not the entire city. There have been two attempts to districtify this city before which ran dry, but I remain strongly in favour of that. So much so that I've gone ahead and started work on four districts already in my userspace. Rotterdam is a good 30% larger than Amsterdam, is perhaps less densely populated but definitely isn't lacking in what it has to offer both to on and off the beaten path, yet the city isn't districtified and a lot of the city's potential is not yet visible in the article that stands now. The Europoort and Maasvlaktes for example are notable parts of Rotterdam, yet only get a mention in the lede at present.

Right now, I'd give this a strong not yet, with a strong suggestion to look into districtifying Rotterdam before considering this again. I don't know how others feel about districtifying, so hence why I am pitching the argument here rather than on Rotterdam's talk page. Wauteurz (talk) 11:26, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Not yet. As stated before lat/longs needs to be added (not only Drink section but also others) and overall cleanup for dead links, out of date info and style of text. But even were these to be fixed, the district discussion needs to be sorted first. I don't see that many listings added in the near future to even justify separate district pages other then the center. Well, maybe Delfshaven. WallyTheWalrus (talk) 09:53, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

---

@Wauteurz, Tai123.123, AlasdairW, WallyTheWalrus: After two months, the article is still at usable, and with nothing being done on top of the districtification issues still there, slush? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:29, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

I'd agree to slushing this for now. The districtification discussion never really got off the ground to begin with, but I have done work behind the scenes to where I currently have articles either largely done or completely done for the city centre, Delfshaven, Feijenoord, Europoort/Harbour, Kralingen and North (linked here). Progression, however came to a stop as I had to focus more on uni, and I haven't pushed anything to mainspace yet since the discussion never went anywhere. Perhaps it might just be easier to go ahead with districtification sometime early next year after everything from the current article has been transferred, and leave the missing districts to be filled over time?
-- Wauteurz (talk) 13:07, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Slush Tai123.123 (talk) 18:21, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Result: slushed, and article has been downgraded to usable SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:36, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Can we please remove the "starpotential" template? A usable-level article does not have obvious star potential. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:06, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Sure. I just added it as per the instructions in WV:Star nominations but feel free to remove it. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:08, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

removed. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:31, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

What to do about the redlinked districts?

Rotterdam is districtified but three of those districts lack articles, and apparently the attempt to restart the district discussion a few years ago wasn't successful. Looking at the map, these districts are also at the outskirts of Rotterdam where one would expect much less visitor attractions than in the central parts of a city, so potential articles might be pretty short anyways.

Would it be a good idea to merge the redlink articles into existing articles; e.g. Zuid into Feijenoord (Feijenoord and south?) and Capelle en Noordoost and Nieuwerkerk aan den IJssel into Kralingen-Crooswijk (Kralingen, Crooswijk and east?).

Alternatively, if some of these aren't administratively part of Rotterdam we could just move them from the district division to for instance Rotterdam-The Hague Metropolitan Region, or would the eastern districts fit better into Groene Hart? Ypsilon (talk) 17:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

The districtification ended up being mostly a project of mine, with the final districts being a mid-way solution between the first and second proposals made above. Early in 2022, the project kind of fell off of my radar. After that summer, I ended up picking up Belgian coast by tram, and at that point forgot about the unfinished business here. I'm not able to complete the three remaining districts in short time, but before the end of the year should be doable.

The thing with other regions is: I wanted to undo the merger of the Metropolitan Region at some point in the future, since it's a way too big region for our 7+2 standard. Merging regions into there just kicks the can further down the road. Merging districts into one another I don't think would be ideal. Noordoost is already merged with Capelle aan den IJssel, since Noordoost is mostly suburbs and a mall, whereas Capelle is an actual town with history and points of interest. Due to the physical boundary between the two that is the A16, merging it with anything to its west doesn't make sense to me. Zuid into Feyenoord would make more sense for the same reason. Nieuwerkerk aan den IJssel isn't part of Rotterdam itself, and should probably be merged into Het Groene Hart if it comes to that, but since it leans to Rotterdam first, Gouda second, I'd suggest keeping it in this hierarchy.

In summary: I've taken potential article length into account when drafting the districts as they are now. They should all make decent articles, but the only one I'm hesitant about would be Zuid. Again, I'd prefer to take a shot at populating the district articles before then, but availability-wise, I'm not very consistent at the moment.
― Wauteurz (talk) 12:34, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Districts don't have to be limited to 9 if a larger number would be more useful. What would the total number be if the merger were maintained? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:17, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek: The limiting to nine was in reference to my plans to eventually, at some stage, undo the 2017 merger that was done to the regions of Rijnmond and Haaglanden (now Rotterdam-The Hague Metropolitan Region). They don't contain districts, but destinations, Rotterdam one of them. I've touched on my motivation for that vision before, but that discussion is better to have on the appropriate talk page.

As for Rotterdam's districts, like I said, the districts as they exist now were drafted in such a way that each one of them should be good enough for a usable article of decent length. The only change I could see be made to it, would be to integrate Nieuwerkerk aan den IJssel with the region of Groene Hart, which would leave Rotterdam with eight districts instead of nine.

I have, since writing my previous message, started Rotterdam/Zuid. I hope to populate it over the next few weeks. The other two districts will follow after :)
― Wauteurz (talk) 18:46, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

OK, I don't really understand how that answers my question, but in any case, I trust your judgment, so it doesn't matter. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't think I got the question in that case. What merger did you mean exactly? ― Wauteurz (talk) 19:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

The one you mentioned. The question you didn't answer in a way I understood was how many districts there would be if the merger were kept. But like I said, that's OK. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I see. To be clear, I wouldn't recommend a merge of any of the districts, hence why I (finally) started to populate the redlinked ones. What's been discussed so far, and my stance on them would be:

• Merging Zuid into Feijenoord - Understandable, Zuid mostly is just suburbs. I only set Feijenoord apart due to its very outstanding local identity. In contexts outside of Wikivoyage hierarchies, Feijenoord is also a part of Zuid.
• Merging Capelle en Noordoost into Kralingen-Crooswijk - A hard no from me. The physical barrier between these two is greater than between K-C and Northern Rotterdam. Merging Nieuwerkerk a/d IJssel and Capelle a/d IJssel would make more sense to me.
• Removing Nieuwerkerk aan den IJssel from the Rotterdam districts, and categorising it under Groene Hart when it gets made - And this too I can understand. Nieuwerkerk is a city in its own right and sits between Rotterdam and Gouda, being removed far enough from both to be a destination on its own.

Each of these options removes one redlinked district from the equation. There currently are nine districts, three of which are redlinked.

As for adding districts to Rotterdam (I know this wasn't discussed, but I haven't really expressed this before so I might as well document them here), I see five possible additions:

• Hook of Holland: Part of Rotterdam proper but not in our hierarchy. I kept it out, as it's effectively an awkward exclave of Rotterdam. Hook has made a name for itself as a tourist destination before being annexed by Rotterdam, so that weighed into the equation too.
• Maassluis, Vlaardingen and Schiedam: Heavily associated with Rotterdam. I believe I kept them out because I kept Hook out.
• Lastly, Albrandswaard sits awkwardly between Rotterdam, Zuid-Hollandse Eilanden and Alblasserwaard-Drechtsteden. It would make most sense existing in ZHE, as it too, is an island in the south of South Holland.

I should add that these additions more or less reinstate the former region of Rijnmond. The remaining bits of the Metropoolregio more or less are the Haagland and Delfland.

I hope that clears everything up? If not, this thread has put my unfinished work here back on my radar. I'll try my best to get the redlinked articles usable before the end of the year, solving the issue that started this discussion in the first place. If that doesn't succeed, then merging always remains an option.
― Wauteurz (talk) 20:24, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I understand. 14 districts would be a lot, though not per se untenable if it were best for travelers (for example, they could be divided into 2 or more groups), but you believe it isn't, and I understand your reasoning and defer to your judgment. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Great to hear your points. As Ikan mentioned, the number of districts is not limited to nine (as a districtified city is comparable to a bottom level region). However 14 does seem like a lot as Rotterdam isn't New York or Beijing. In general, if the place can be considered an integral part of Rotterdam then it's best to list it as part of the city (or expand a city district to include it), and if it's separate, then it's better handled as a city in the surrounding or adjacent region. But you as an (almost) local probably know best what fits where :). --Ypsilon (talk) 17:10, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Alright, quick little update: I've spent a bit of my weekends and late nights populating the redlinked districts with some sees and dos, as well as sleep listings, and added Hook of Holland and Albrandswaard into Rotterdam's districts as per the reasons above. I'll keep Vlaardingen, Maassluis and Schiedam out, and, unless there's anyone against it, I'll remove Nieuwerkerk (which is not a part of Rotterdam proper) from the district list as its municipality, Zuidplas, is already redlinked in Groene Hart. That would then leave us with a nice and round ten districts. :)
― Wauteurz (talk) 00:13, 2 September 2024 (UTC)