I have gone over this article and tried to add more info from my various sources but couldn't find much more to add. There are a few clarify and fact tags, but the article appears to me to be more or less complete content-wise and is adequately cited. The article reads well, is interesting and comprehensive. I therefore would like to know if others agree that this article should be upgraded to A-class. See Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/A-Class criteria for criteria. COI - I destubbed this article and have added a minor amount of text in the recent upgrade. -- mav ( talk) 01:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- I don't have any objections, but I hope this will be a short-lived A-class and become FA soon! ;-) (Of course, I may have a COI.) --
Itub (
talk)
05:09, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Wow. The first time I visited this article I was disappointed by its lack of information and sources. Great job in upgrading it! Gopher65 talk 06:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Done. Normally I'd wait a week but given that plenty of people have seen this message and this article will likely become GA soon anyway, I went ahead and upgraded a bit early. Well done everybody! -- mav ( talk) 03:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
I have gone over this article and tried to add more info from my various sources but couldn't find much more to add. There are a few clarify and fact tags, but the article appears to me to be more or less complete content-wise and is adequately cited. The article reads well, is interesting and comprehensive. I therefore would like to know if others agree that this article should be upgraded to A-class. See Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/A-Class criteria for criteria. COI - I destubbed this article and have added a minor amount of text in the recent upgrade. -- mav ( talk) 01:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- I don't have any objections, but I hope this will be a short-lived A-class and become FA soon! ;-) (Of course, I may have a COI.) --
Itub (
talk)
05:09, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Wow. The first time I visited this article I was disappointed by its lack of information and sources. Great job in upgrading it! Gopher65 talk 06:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- Done. Normally I'd wait a week but given that plenty of people have seen this message and this article will likely become GA soon anyway, I went ahead and upgraded a bit early. Well done everybody! -- mav ( talk) 03:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)