User talk:PsychologyStudentMaas

Welcome![edit]

Hello, PsychologyStudentMaas, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Romaine (talk) 23:18, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The project page can be found at: Wikipedia:Benelux Education Program/Maastricht University/FPN Historical Book Review Spring 2017. Romaine (talk) 23:18, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback on your article[edit]

Hello PsychologyStudentMaas, Thank you for writing your article in your sandbox! I have read the article and would like to give some feedback to improve your article to Wikipedia standards and customs. I especially will look if it meets the quality standards we have on Wikipedia. I standard look for a series of subjects that need improvement or are okay.

Intro sentence: I would change the order: not: "The book ... was written by ...", but: "... is a book written by ...". I would recommend to add the profession of the author to get a better understanding of why he wrote the book, maybe as well as his nationality/origin. For the rest first paragraph is okay.
Links: excellent!
Headers: The header "Comparison to current opinions on Free will" can be shorter. The header "General" is obsolete, and can be removed.
References: Please add more references, each Wikipedia article should have a series of them. I would like to see more references from multiple sources. It would be great to add also multiple references to the same publication, if multiple parts of a publication are used.
Context/timeframe: Missing!
How was the book received: Missing!

I hope you can implement this feedback to your sandbox article before our next meeting. Thanks! Romaine (talk) 10:49, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello PsychologyStudentMaas, Thank you for improving your article! Last week we specifically asked to make sure you add sources/references to your article, because that is one of the most important parts of a Wikipedia article. We also wanted to make sure the intro sentence/section is ready. Let's see how it is going now.

Intro sentence: Good, after I changed engl. to full.
Links: Good!
Headers: Good, after I fixed them for you.
References: Great you added sources. You added them now at the bottom of the article, but we also would like inline references. Please add if possible also references in all the sections, as well as section "Content" where you can indicate where certain parts come from in the book, like the chapter or page. Try to give each paragraph one reference.
Context/timeframe: Good start, but I prefer to see more.
How was the book received: Good, but perhaps can be longer.
Other: I am not sure what you tried to do below the first paragraph?

Keep up the good work! Romaine (talk) 03:07, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello PsychologyStudentMaas, I add the image of the book to your sandbox article. Romaine (talk) 05:48, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Das Problem der Willensfreiheit in der neuesten deutschen Philosophie[edit]

Hi, I'm Nick Moyes. PsychologyStudentMaas, thanks for creating Das Problem der Willensfreiheit in der neuesten deutschen Philosophie!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. There are too many inline citations that refer to pages in Müffelmann's own book, and not enough to third party sources which write about the book. Therefore, this article reads like a good student essay, but not nearly enough like an encyclopaedia; it should clearly explain why the book is notable, and what others said about it, and its impact. Sorry to be negative, but I have to judge articles written by university students just as I would any other contributor.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Nick Moyes (talk) 02:23, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Das Problem der Willensfreiheit in der neuesten deutschen Philosophie for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Das Problem der Willensfreiheit in der neuesten deutschen Philosophie is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Das Problem der Willensfreiheit in der neuesten deutschen Philosophie until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Ploni (talk) 16:11, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]