Talk:Dutch East Indies/GA2

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: – Quadell (talk) 18:06, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Original reviewer: Si Trew (talk) 08:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC) Nominator: User:DeVerm

I have made a lot of copy edits but it is a struggle with this one. It is actually quite a good article but it is a hell of a lot of work to get it there. I assume the author is Dutch and speaks English; I am English and speak some Dutch. So I have changed things for ENglish style but this does need some work on it. I am going to save this now then do a proper GA review to note the points; I think we could get here to GA with cooperation. Si Trew (talk) 09:39, 28 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Simon, thanks for taking up this review! I think the main editors of the last year or so have been User:Merbabu and myself. I am the English speaking Dutchmen you were referring to but I think Merbabu lives in Australia. I have been looking at your edits and would never have come up with those (actually never noticed the problems) so your help is much appreciated :-) Let me know what I can do --DeVerm (talk) 14:40, 28 July 2011 (UTC).


 * I had the misfortune to get married in early August, so sorry for being away from this article for so long. I will do copy edits for English style in the article itself, but please feel free to revert any you are not happy with, if I accidentally change your meaning, A.U.B. please revert or change them back if I mistakenly change your sense. Si Trew (talk) 12:22, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

2nd review
Greetings. I am willing to take over this review. It is quite a long and involved article, and it will take me a couple of days. – Quadell (talk) 18:06, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * IMO (as perhaps the articles main contributor), I don't think it is ready for GA. It was nominated without consultation with other editors. There is still a lot of work to be done, and I am not sure how well that will work with a GA review in the background. However, the feedback could be useful. just saying. cheers --Merbabu (talk) 00:18, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to have to concur with Merbabu here. Due to the huge improvement/rewrite that the article is currently undergoing (50 edits in the last 4 days), I'm going to have to quickfail this article for stability issues. The article has many strengths, and after this current round of improvements are done it stands a very good chance of attaining GA status. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 12:47, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank íou for taking this over. It DOES need rewrite for UK style, which is whz I took so long trying to put it that way, to no good effect. It failed first time as quick delete and it will fail again. If we work together then we might get there together to get it to GA, but if Mirabu is so up his own arse that it is a good article let him take it on his own. Geen Gezuur. Si Trew (talk) 14:09, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Simon, I took the time to be very specific about the issues with your editing - note all the edit summaries I left. Perhaps I wasted my time and a hard revert would have been better? You'l also notice I made a more general comment on your talk page about your edits. I note you still haven't fixed your keyboard. --Merbabu (talk) 14:17, 31 August 2011 (UTC)