Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Very valid concerns have been raised here, especially regarding sourcing, and since no action has been taken to correct them, I will delist this. Challenger.rebecca ( talk) 03:13, 1 July 2017 (UTC) reply

I am asking for a community reassessment of this page as I believe it no longer meets the criteria for a GA. Large chunks of this article lack sources, and much of the rest of it is based on a single source, which is a little problematic. There are also issues with neutrality, which are connected to the sourcing issue (since much of the puffery is unsourced) but some of the language would be a problem even with sources. I'd delist it myself, except this is my first time participating in the GAR process, so I thought I'd take it slow. Vanamonde ( talk) 09:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC) reply