The article was promoted 15:54, 26 July 2007.
I believe this article passes the FA criteria. Epbr123 08:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Let's look at the first para in History.
So I can't endorse this until the fine-tuning is done. I think it has the makings of a really good FA that we can be proud of, but significantly more work is required to achieve that. PS It's not just grammar, but a whole bunch of aspects of the language that will make it good. Do you know where to find copy-editors? Research the edit-history pages of related FAs. Tony 15:14, 9 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The article was promoted 15:54, 26 July 2007.
I believe this article passes the FA criteria. Epbr123 08:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Let's look at the first para in History.
So I can't endorse this until the fine-tuning is done. I think it has the makings of a really good FA that we can be proud of, but significantly more work is required to achieve that. PS It's not just grammar, but a whole bunch of aspects of the language that will make it good. Do you know where to find copy-editors? Research the edit-history pages of related FAs. Tony 15:14, 9 July 2007 (UTC) reply