Wikipedia:Peer review/Jørgen Iversen Dyppel/archive1

Jørgen Iversen Dyppel

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for November 2008.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for November 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I've just added a substantial chunk of info to it, and I'd like fresh eyes to take a look at the style/language, any weasel words that might have snuck in, POV problems it could have, etc.

Thanks, Mikkel (talk) 10:33, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, my usual random thoughts: More to come. 4u1e (talk) 19:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC) More to come. 4u1e (talk) 07:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC) It's an interesting and well-researched story. Your English is far superior to my French (my only second language), but I recommend that you get the article copyedited by a native English speaker: there's quite a lot of mildly incorrect or non-standard usage in the article. Hope these comments are helpful. 4u1e (talk) 20:37, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 4u1e's comments
 * You need to do a check to ensure that refs follow punctuation and not the other way round.
 * You've got a lot of single sentence paragraphs - see if you can build them up into more substantial topic-based ones.
 * Where there appear to be gaps in the story (i.e. Dyppell's education) they need to be filled, or a positive statement along the lines of "little is known about..." could be included if this is the case.
 * You should probably gives rigsdaler in full at the first appearance, and you need to disambiguate the link used.
 * "(and piousness for white servants)" How did he mandate piousness? Indentured servants is linked here for a second time, and does not need to be.
 * It would be useful to review the tense of the article as well. As a historical article it should pretty much be in straight past tense throughout. I spotted a few inappropriate uses of present tense: "Taylor notes that none may leave the island" (Taylor noted that none could leave the island), "In the subsequent investigation, it comes forth that" (In the subsequent investigation, it came forth that) etc. There may be more examples.
 * "Among Dyppel's initial tasks included" could be simply "Dyppel's initial tasks included"?
 * "Due to the Danes not being used to the climate (Krarup mentions that the Danes had trouble with "the poisonous fumes" of the tropical forest, as well as the foreign food, whereas the Dutch were better acclimatized[22]), as well as the Franco-Dutch and Anglo-Dutch wars, this proved a complex undertaking." What is the complex undertaking referred to here? It's not clear from the current wording.
 * The connection between the first and second sentences of the 10th para of 'Governership' isn't really clear. Presumably Dyppel was considered a good governor?
 * "Krarup has a dim view of the predominantly Dutch and convicted settlers, but skips over Dyppel's countrymen (Danes, Norwegians, and Holsteiners" As currently worded, this is more a comment on Krarup than Dyppel: can it be re-worded to focus more on Dyppel?
 * "Esmit was welcomed with warmly" "with" is not needed here; where was he welcomed warmly and by whom?
 * "Dyppel called upon the new administration to review his term, for which he got a public declaration of appreciation" Not sure what is meant by this sentence: whose term was reviewed (presumably Jansen?), and who got a public declaration (presumably Dyppel?). The sentence is ambiguous at present. Also, what is a "public declaration of appreciation"?
 * "not affectionate of the German" Was Esmit German? This has not been mentioned previously.