Talk:Lodewijk van den Berg/GA1

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

I am reviewing this article. Diderot&#39;s dreams (talk) 06:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations, Lodewijk van den Berg is now a Good Article.

The article fulfills all of the requirements. It is sufficiently broad and clearly written, all pictures are copyright OK, it has no OR or POV, is properly sourced, the lead summarizes the article, etc., etc. The only GA criterion snag was minor: that 'References' should read 'Notes and references', but I took care of that. It also was a little thin, but I fattened it up by including some of the guy's research papers. There may be more, Google Scholar is not complete as far as I know. That's something to think of for bios. If somebody does research work and has a PhD, they've published some papers, no doubt.

If you want to improve the article more, I would suggest looking for more academic work (e.g. his PhD thesis) and I bet there's some more general info in those sources. Also one of the refs could be fleshed out.

But good job! Diderot&#39;s dreams (talk) 04:31, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank, I'll try finding some of that stuff and see if I can round it out a bit more. --Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 11:24, 27 February 2009 (UTC)