Wikipedia

Talk:Prostitution in the Netherlands

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Untitled

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Go ahead.--Patrick 14:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Many cities tolerated prostitution to protect chaste female citizens from rape and defilement. This is a rediculous statement.

History

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I'm busy adding some history about prostitution in the Netherlands. I'm reading all kinds of books about Dutch prostitution. This article is a mess at this point, and I'm figuring if everything I'm saying is correct. Chronology is a difficult subject and books are not clear about that. Not everything has been said and there are some very interesting details on which I will elaborate. I also hope to add an extra chapter about the prostitution laws in the Netherlands. Please correct my misspellings.--Bruno Junqueira 20:18, 26 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

WOW! That's impressive, but it so long and so rich in information, maybe it merits a separate page like History of Prostitution in the Netherlands? -- C mon 20:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

The Norwegian Report

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Somebody added..... Norwegian government published a report comparing two opposite choices in dealing with prostitution, the Dutch one and the (prohibitionist and criminalizing) Swedish choice. It turned out that, although there are still some unsatisfactory issues, the Dutch approach seems to be much more effective than the Swedish one in ruling prostitution and fighting crime.[1] I have to add that the conclusions off this report are partly based on the korpsmonitors (2003[2] and 2004[3]) and the "Plan van Aanpak Ordening en Bescherming Prostitutiesector"[4] These reports state with great euphoria that the regulated sex businesses have been largely cleaned up and that human trafficking has moved underground. There is no evidence of that however. The Fourth report of the Dutch National Rapporteur[5] gives different numbers. Look at page 14, footnote 17 A total of 54 sex establishments [in 2003] were involved in the successfully completed investigations into THB, of which 19 were unlicensed. In 2002 this figure was 140, 38 of which were unlicensed. Most of the sex establishments where the human trafficking takes place seem to be licensed!!--Bruno Junqueira 15:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Demographics has shifted since 1998/1999

edit
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Somebody added.....However with new legislation from 2001 that prohibits migrants from outside the European Union to work legaly, demographics most likely has shifted. That's true. But there has been no new research since 1999. I have done my own research last year (2005) by studying a consumers site for prostitute clients (hookers.nl). The Johns described more than 3.500 prostitutes in the Netherlands. The percentages have shifted. There are now slightly more Dutch prostitutes, the number of African prostitutes seems to have decreased a lot (from 13% to 3%), and there seem to be more Asian (Thai) prostitutes. The numbers for the Eastern European and Latin American prostitutes are very similar. However, this is original research, and I cannot include this in the Wikipedia article.--Bruno Junqueira 15:19, 1 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Content and accuracy

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This article is problematic. I am writing a book on this, it needs major work. Mgoodyear (talk) 00:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Agreed, and I've tagged the article as such. The claim that prostitutes in the Netherlands are overwhelmingly trafficked is just that, a claim, from partisan sources, such as CATW. The views of all sides in this controversy need to be given here without any view being favored. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 17:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Human trafficking - unsourced information

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The section starts out saying: "The Netherlands is a primary country of destination for victims of human trafficking." No source is given for this and given the small size of the country I find it very hard to believe. Loren Pechtel (talk) 02:30, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. I am deleting it. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 03:25, 24 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dutch prostitution: only in certain areas?

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Isn't it possible that the prostitution in Holland that gets the most attention is concentrated in certain red-light areas that are considered problematic and vulnerable to human trafficking, whereas much of the sex-trade exists outside those areas and through escort services? The same type of situation exists elsewhere.

I was disappointed not to find any mention of "tippelzones," which was linked to this page from the page "Prostitution in Germany." Dick Kimball (talk) 13:45, 11 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Neutral point of view

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago13 comments4 people in discussion

I have made some revisions and deletions. A lot of the negative claims in this article are either unsourced, or sourced to blogs. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 03:26, 24 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

I have again deleted the giant text dump with either bad sources, no sources, and using POV language. This article will adhere to NPOV and will not be a forum for people to list all the negative aspects of prostitution. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 00:13, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

The text that you removed was perfectly sourced. Every fact was linked to a reliable source. You can't just keep deleating imformation again and again, just because you wish people would't read about it. 86.121.10.121 (talk) 00:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Why do you keep removing the imformation about the former prostitute Karina Schaapman and her report??

Why do you keep removing imformation about the UNODC (UN Office on Drugs and Crime) report??

Why do you keep removing imformation about the Dutch National Rapporteurs on human trafficking??

Why do you keep removing imformation about the 2008 case of human trafficking and about what Jan van Dijk said about it??

Why do you keep removing imformation about the Human Rights Report on human trafficking in Netherlands??

Why do you keep removing imformation about the 809 registered victims of human trafficking in 2008, according to figures obtained from the National Centre against Human Trafficking??

Why do you keep removing imformation about the poster created by the Dutch authorities in order to prevent human trafficking??

WHY??

All these facts are perfectly sourced.

86.121.10.121 (talk) 00:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Blogs are not reliable sources. Random websites are not reliable sources. And furthermore, reliable sources or not, as I have stated several times now, this article is about Prostitution in one country and as such, it needs to cover that topic. It is not a place to write monographs on Human Trafficking and the negative aspects of prostitution, which are common to all countries and belong in the Human Trafficking and/or Prostitution articles. All of the text you want to add is nothing more than an attempt to make the article into a political soapbox, which is not acceptable. WP:NPOV, WP:UNDUE, WP:NOT. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 02:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

The links I provided are not to blogs or to random websites. They are links to the reports themselves and to the press articles.

Yes, as you said, this article is about Prostitution in one country and as such, it needs to cover that topic- including human trafficking.

Most Wikipedia articles on prostitution in a certain country offer extensive imformation on human trafficking in that country, and other "negative" facts about the situation from that place. Why should this imformation about Netherlands not be included here? Why should Prostitution in Netherlands be spared of the negative imformation??

Human trafficking is a problem everywhere, but the problem appears to be worse in Netherlands than in other countries; Netherlands is among the most common destinations for victims, according to UNODC (together with Thailand, Japan, Israel, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Turkey and the US), and this needs to be mentioned. 86.121.8.99 (talk) 02:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Why sholud relevant imformation be kept out of the article?

Why sholudn't readers be imformed about the current situation in Netherlands?

Statistics on human trafficking are extremly important, as is the report of the former prostitute and what Jan van Dijk said. 86.121.8.99 (talk) 03:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

The human trafficking info is massively unbalanced. A full 3/4thf of the article is now basically a soapbox for "prostitution is evil". Your placement of the "information" is telling and it is obvious that you have a POV to push, that "prostitution is bad and ruins everyones lives". The article shouldn't be about that and it's not a soapbox! And would you STOP using circular logic and self-fulfilling questions like "Why sholud relevant imformation be kept out of the article". The information is NOT relevant, you just think it is. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 03:16, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

First of all I am not trying to push a POV, and I'm keeping my personal oppinions on prostitution out of this article. It appers however that you're not. The human trafficking info is not unbalanced, these are facts. The facts are that Netherlands appears to have a problem with human trafficking which is more serious than in many other countries. Since this is a fact (supported by evidence-all the reports) this needs to be mentioned. The imformation is very relevant, it appears irrelevant and unbalanced to you, because you have a POV. Without all these imformation, the article is incomplete, so please stop deleting it. 86.121.8.99 (talk) 03:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

I deleted the paragraph about human trafficking from the introduction. Is this fine now? Is the article ballanced enough now? 86.121.8.99 (talk) 03:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Fine: I moved the paragraph about Jan van Dijk from the introduction into the human trafficking section, to create a more balanced article. Is this OK now?

I hope our edit war is over and the article stays this way. 86.121.8.99 (talk) 03:52, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for discussing. The prostitute article is superflous, as the paragraph right before it says pretty much the same thing. We don't need two paragraphs that say 75% of hookers in Amsterdam are foreigners. Also, the Human Trafficking section should be with the Red Light District section, as they are related subjects. The problem is not that "there are facts", the issue is whether they belong in the article. Much of the information you keep reinserting is about human trafficking in general, and belongs in the article on human trafficking. The article does not need to be 3/4ths about human trafficking, but should concentrate only on human trafficking in Amsterdam (and then, only in balance with the remainder of the article. If you insist on WP:OWNing the article we may be forced to seek dispute resolution. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 19:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply


Ok, look I don't want to start a new editing war with you. The study made by the former prostitute is from 2008, this study also prompted the authorities to take several measures, so it is very important, and it needs to be included here. The pragraph about the nationality of the prostitutes is from 2000- 8 years earlier than the study made by the prostitute.

This article needs a section about human trafficking. Netherlands is a top destination for victims (as shown by the UN report), and this needs to be said in the article. The imformation I keep inserting is not about "human trafficking in general", it is about human trafficking in Netherlands.

Much of the imformation you have deleted was not added by me, but by other editors.

I agree with reverting the paragraph about the poster, now I realize that it was sourced to blog, but it was not me who added it, apparently it's been here for a long time. I'll delete it. All the other imformation has a reliable source.

I'll shorten the human traffickig section. I will alo move the human traffickig down the page, under the "Reducing the size of the red light district" section. I'll also keep out the refrence to human trafficking from the intro and I'll also delete some paragraphs about human trafficking, to shorten the section. But a few statistics need to remain.

I repeat, very much of what you deleted was not added by me, but by other editors. 86.121.10.102 (talk) 20:13, 25 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Adding views on the legalization

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I think it would be interesting to briefly summarize the different point of views on whether the legalization was a positive or negative move. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeanMrk (talk • contribs) 09:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

ethnicity of prostitution customers and pimps?

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

What is the ethnicity of the customers of prostitutes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toadsmithe (talk • contribs) 20:23, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
How old must be clients of prostitutes in The Netherlands?

--August Dominus (talk) 21:50, 20 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Prostitution in the Netherlands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:09, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Prostitution in the Netherlands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:17, 20 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Prostitution in the Netherlands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:37, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Prostitution_in_the_Netherlands&oldid=1212408495"