Talk:Jacobus Deketh/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Thurgate (talk · contribs) 13:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
prose: (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Comments

1. lieutenant. Suggest - Wiki link

2. extraordinary captain. According to who?

3. and sailed to the Dutch East Indies. Suggest - who sailed to the Dutch East Indies.

4. He had as older brothers. Suggest - He had three older brothers

5. came probably from Jutland in Denmark. Suggest - Although his fathers origins are unknown it is likely that he came from Jutland in Denmark.

You may also want to send this article to the Guild of Copywriters as their are some other sentence issues that need to be looked at. Thurgate (talk) 13:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow you to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns. Thurgate (talk) 13:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Issues addressed — see your talk page. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 14:27, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Passed. Good job. Thurgate (talk) 21:50, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA?

This is a Good Article? All five paragraphs of it? Perhaps someone can explain to me what this means, in footnote 8, "Netherlands Archive items 2393, 2394 ships logs". What "Netherlands Archive"? Or what that bare URL in footnote 10 is doing ("I couldn't find a title" is not good enough). Drmies (talk) 21:54, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done — fixed errors. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 22:03, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the point is being missed here. I had asked Drmies to look at this article. I think there is a serious lack of coverage here, and it is to that Drmies is referring when he says "All five paragraphs of it?" LadyofShalott 22:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised that this got passed as a GA, yes: it's thin and short, and that we're finding little problems with it after it got passed is not a good sign. Drmies (talk) 03:19, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This was what the article was like when it passed. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 07:57, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sparse yeah, but google books picks up nothing about him..♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:11, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And that's Google. I'd say all the sources have been combined into that article as well as possible. --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 12:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm concerned about GA criteria 3 which says the article is broad in coverage. There are a host of book sources in the "further reading" section and yet none of them are used in the article. With that many book sources, I'm afraid the article only touches on the subject. Why have none of the book sources been used?--v/r - T P 19:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]