Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dutch Empire

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Dutch Empire

Toolbox

I'm nominating this article for featured article because I feel that it is finished, and it is good enough to become a featured atricle. Red4tribe (talk) 21:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments

  • En dashes for year ranges per WP:DASH
  • Space for page numbers, so it's "p. 10" not "p.10"
    • Done. Someone needs to check out ref#45 and 46, however. -Señor Lelandro 04:55, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Remove spaces before references like in "war. [9] The "

Gary King (talk) 21:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

  • There is no requirement in any guideline that I'm aware of for a space between the page and number; many editors (depends on the country, I suspect?) do not use a space. WP:WIAFA calls for consistently formatted citations; as long as the space or lack of space are consistent, that's fine. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment: That is a terrible picture of the declaration of Indonesian independence. Can't we do better? Rmhermen (talk) 00:12, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

  • Nearly all your non-print references are unformatted. Ref #45 looks odd.
  • Section headers shouldn't start with articles and shouldn't repeat the title of the article unless absolutely necessary.
  • Uncited weasel word - "arguably" - in "Dutch language" section"
  • Both American and British spelling are present in the article: i.e. recognise, defence, neighbor, colonise.
  • Plenty of redundancy:
    • "There are still some archaeological remains of Fort Goede Hoop (modern Hartford, Connecticut) and Fort Orange (modern Albany, New York)"
  • "The success of these voyages led to the founding of a number of companies competing for the trade."
  • "During the Franco-Dutch War, which saw the Republic be invaded by France, the Dutch seized a number of French possessions in the Caribbean and South America, including Tobago and French Guiana"
  • Per User:Tony1/How_to_satisfy_Criterion_1a#Misplaced_formality, "in order to" should probably be replaced with just plain "to".
  • Not all footnotes are placed directly after punctuation.
  • Centuries should probably be linked in the lead - they give context.
  • "Dutch merchants and sailors also participated in the surge of exploration that unfolded in the 16th and 17th centuries, though the vast new territories revealed by Willem Barents, Henry Hudson, Willem Janszoon and Abel Tasman in the Arctic and in Australasia/Oceania did not generally become permanent Dutch colonies."
  • "With Dutch naval power rising rapidly as a major force from the late 16th century," - awkward phrasing, recommend replacing the word "from" in particular.
  • "reigned supreme at sea"? You don't need to source the lead, but I'd like to see a reference (provided here) for such an extravagant claim.
  • "The restored portions of the Dutch empire, notably the Dutch East Indies and Suriname remained under the Netherlands' control until the decline of traditional imperialism following World War II." - you're missing a comma
  • Many short paragraphs that need to be merged

I probably barely scratched the surface here - you're going to need a full copyedit, preferably more than one, before this article is up to par. Recommend withdrawal. Nousernamesleftcopper, not wood 00:56, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments your website references are lacking all bibliographical information. At the very least you need publisher, title and last access date. Author and other information are good to have if known. Some of the website sources are just plain urls, they need titles as well as all the other information. The link checker tool is showing a dead link. When the references are formatted consistently, I'll try to recheck for reliablity. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:45, 10 June 2008 (UTC)