Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

This orange-tagged article clearly fails criteria 2b. There are many paragraphs lacking citations. I brought this issue up at the talk page a while ago, but there doesn't seem to be much interest.-- FutureTrillionaire ( talk) 16:47, 8 June 2013 (UTC) reply

• Keep All paragraphs now properly cited, found deadlinks had been replaced or removed. ThisAvatar ( discuss– ?) 06:40, 9 June 2013 (UTC) reply
  • Nice job. The article looks good now, but I'll keep this GAR open for a week in case others want to comment.-- FutureTrillionaire ( talk) 13:57, 9 June 2013 (UTC) reply
• Keep There were many unwanted contents but I can see most of them have been removed and I believe all of the paragraphs are now properly cited. Further work needs to be done but it should now be allowed to retain its status as a good article. Knight of Gloucestershire ( talk) 19:09, 9 June 2013 (UTC) reply

Result: Keep
The issues that led to this GAR have been resolved.-- FutureTrillionaire ( talk) 19:03, 16 June 2013 (UTC) reply