Talk:Hendrik Pieter Nicolaas Muller

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hendrik Pieter Nicolaas Muller article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Hendrik Pieter Nicolaas Muller was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 22, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
April 4, 2018	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

International relations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Africa: Liberia / Morocco / Mozambique / South Africa / Ghana Mid‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Liberia portal This article is supported by WikiProject Liberia (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Morocco portal This article is supported by WikiProject Morocco (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Mozambique (assessed as Mid-importance).
	South Africa portal This article is supported by WikiProject South Africa (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Ghana (assessed as Mid-importance).

Assessment[edit]

The priority for this article in WPBiography is set at 'low'. I would want to suggest this to be set to 'high', as Muller fulfils the criteria for it. He 'had a large impact in [his] main discipline', namely representing the Orange Free State and the Boer cause in Europe during the Second Boer War. He was known and is remembered for it in The Netherlands, South Africa, and Great Britain, making the second criterium ('Had some impact outside their country of origin') also valid. Michel Doortmont 28 feb 2008 10:08 CET —Preceding comment was added at 09:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

WP:Good article usage is a survey of the language and style of Wikipedia editors in articles being reviewed for Good article nomination. It will help make the experience of writing Good Articles as non-threatening and satisfying as possible if all the participating editors would take a moment to answer a few questions for us, in this section please. The survey will end on April 30.

Would you like any additional feedback on the writing style in this article?

Yes please.

If you write a lot outside of Wikipedia, what kind of writing do you do?

Academic writing, short (articles) and long texts (books) on history and international relations, lecture notes and presentations, etc., etc.

Is your writing style influenced by any particular WikiProject or other group on Wikipedia?

In format and somewhat in style by WikiProject Biography.

At any point during this review, let us know if we recommend any edits, including markup, punctuation and language, that you feel don't fit with your writing style. Thanks for your time. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 03:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Michel Doortmont (talk) 09:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA assessment[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is well on its way to GA status, passing almost all criteria. However, there are two problems:

It misses inline citations to the references provided, and
The section 'Dutch history and heritage' needs editing.

Therefore put on hold for the moment.

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Makeshift Thackery (talk) 12:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Passed article; Makeshift Thackery seems to have left, and all issues seem addressed. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 08:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All issues except failing citerion 2B, which remains an issue today. – Editør (talk) 09:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inline citations[edit]

This article almost completely lacks inline citations, which is a major issue in regard to retaining its good article status. – Editør (talk) 09:57, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Hendrik Pieter Nicolaas Muller/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Has very few inline citations so can not be considered a WP:Good Article. AIRcorn (talk) 22:25, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted Mostly uncited. AIRcorn (talk) 01:05, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]