Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Rcsprinter123 ( talk · contribs) 11:23, 27 October 2012 (UTC) reply

Quick fail. This article doesn't really look like GA material anyway; a closer examination revealed no pictures, a bare link and some minor edit wars in the past. Nominator is IP who has only contributed to the article recently, and doesn't appear to understand all of the criteria for GAs. Furthermore, the section "Exceptions to Generation Effect" is copied word-for-word from this source, and copypasting is an absolute no-no in any article, not to mention our best work. Also, the lead is too short, there aren't enough links, an infobox may be appropriate, there are several phrase redundancies, there are references before the period, no previous copyediting seems to have been commissioned, I could go on and on. Not at all ready yet. Rcsprinter (orate) @ 11:23, 27 October 2012 (UTC) reply