The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Hahc21 ( talk · contribs) 00:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC) Hi! I'll be reviewing this article. -- Hahc21 ( talk) 00:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
On resume. Every phrase form the lead is not well-written.
I'd recomment that if the nominator/contributor hasn't finished the article, work on it on his/her sandbox before moving it into the main namespace. Also, get the article peer reviewed or copyedited to avoid bad prose and prepare it for the GA process.
Final comments: Another quick fail. Only on prose this article fails the process. Also, some bad sources, some bad organization. I recomment mostly getting the article copyedited and peer reviewed before renominating. -- Hahc21 ( talk) 00:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Hahc21 ( talk · contribs) 00:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC) Hi! I'll be reviewing this article. -- Hahc21 ( talk) 00:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
On resume. Every phrase form the lead is not well-written.
I'd recomment that if the nominator/contributor hasn't finished the article, work on it on his/her sandbox before moving it into the main namespace. Also, get the article peer reviewed or copyedited to avoid bad prose and prepare it for the GA process.
Final comments: Another quick fail. Only on prose this article fails the process. Also, some bad sources, some bad organization. I recomment mostly getting the article copyedited and peer reviewed before renominating. -- Hahc21 ( talk) 00:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)