Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Jan Willem Spruyt

Jan Willem Spruyt[edit]

This article is part of a series of Orange Free State biographies. This is a new article about a nineteenth-century State Secretary and Acting State President of the Orange Free State. As created, it is more than a stub and I am looking for at least a class=Start in both listed Projects. Michel Doortmont (talk) 09:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Javascript review[edit]

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program:

Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Single years without accompanying dates, decades, and centuries should not be linked unless they provide context for the article.^[?]

Checked date links; remaining ones seem to be relevant for context. Michel Doortmont (talk) 20:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article has no images! Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]

Although the man lived from 1826 to 1908, he was not a very well-known public figure, and left public life around 1871, which makes it unlikely that public images will turn up. Providing an image, if any are available, will constitute original research. Michel Doortmont (talk) 15:04, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~This article is a bit too short, and therefore may be capable of expansion.^[?]~~

Article is now expanded with extra info, although some parts of his life history remain a bit thin. No specific sources seem available to solve this at short notice. At least his whole life is dealt with. Michel Doortmont (talk) 20:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan (talk) 09:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)~~[reply]

Checked on suggestions, none seem to be applicable at this stage. Michel Doortmont (talk) 20:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for B-status[edit]

With the improvements and expansion I want to suggest that the article may qualify for B-status. Your opinions and action please. Michel Doortmont (talk) 20:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw your update of the article and B-status request. The article is now definitely beyond Start-level, so I have asseseed it as B-status. Makeshift Thackery (talk) 09:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for GA-status review[edit]

The article has been further improved. Although it is a short article, it is my feeling that the quality is as good as it can get, and that therefore it could qualify for GA-status in its current form. Apart from the peer review and B-status handled here I have therefore also lodged a review request for GA-status. Who will assist? Michel Doortmont (talk) 09:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]