Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
This article is being reviewed as part of the WikiProject Good Articles. We're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. This article was awarded GA-status back in 2006, so I will be assessing the article to ensure that it is still compliant. Pyrotec ( talk) 18:26, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
The major problem with this article is the lack of in-line citations and in some places problems with the prosse. The article is currently non-compliant with WP:Verify. In particular:
The major problem with this article was lack of WP:Verification. This has now been mostly rectified, so I'm closing this GAR review and marking this article as a "GA keep". Pyrotec ( talk) 21:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
This article is being reviewed as part of the WikiProject Good Articles. We're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. This article was awarded GA-status back in 2006, so I will be assessing the article to ensure that it is still compliant. Pyrotec ( talk) 18:26, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
The major problem with this article is the lack of in-line citations and in some places problems with the prosse. The article is currently non-compliant with WP:Verify. In particular:
The major problem with this article was lack of WP:Verification. This has now been mostly rectified, so I'm closing this GAR review and marking this article as a "GA keep". Pyrotec ( talk) 21:43, 17 September 2009 (UTC)