Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article has been at Peer Review twice already, receiving no comments either time, and has recently been at FAC. The FAC received a limited response and was not promoted; I'm requesting a peer review with the aim of the next FAC going smoothly. My main concerns currently are that of quality of writing, but I would also like comments on other aspects of the article.
Thanks, Sam Walton ( talk) 16:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Did you address all of J Milburn's and Masem's complaints? Tezero ( talk) 05:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
{{ doing}} Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs( talk) 15:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC) Well, I fell off a cliff there, didn't I? Sorry for the extreme delay, but the good news is I didn't have much to pick at. It's a solid article, I think well on its way to FA class. Some thoughts:
Other than that I didn't find much to fault. Coverage seems broad and comprehensive, didn't see any issues with the selection of sources used. Haven't had a chance yet to perform a spot-check to make sure sources are being used appropriately. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs( talk) 19:30, 12 May 2014 (UTC)