The article was not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 00:46, 9 September 2008 [1].
I'm nominating this article for featured article because it is comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and stable. It also has an appropriate lead section, an appropriate structure and consistent citations. There may be minor issues with "engaging, even brilliant" prose, but that, with a little help, can be sorted out easily. I may also add that is already has gone through two exhaustive peer review, and an equally meticulous GA review, on top of long discussions on a few other issues. I am sure the article is ready for this one last hurdle.
Aditya(
talk •
contribs) 16:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
reply
Comments
Oppose, until my issues and the sourcing problems are addressed.
Dabomb87 (
talk) 00:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC) Comments from
Dabomb87 (
talk ·
contribs):
reply
I'll try to come back later. Dabomb87 ( talk) 00:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply
The article was not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 00:46, 9 September 2008 [1].
I'm nominating this article for featured article because it is comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and stable. It also has an appropriate lead section, an appropriate structure and consistent citations. There may be minor issues with "engaging, even brilliant" prose, but that, with a little help, can be sorted out easily. I may also add that is already has gone through two exhaustive peer review, and an equally meticulous GA review, on top of long discussions on a few other issues. I am sure the article is ready for this one last hurdle.
Aditya(
talk •
contribs) 16:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
reply
Comments
Oppose, until my issues and the sourcing problems are addressed.
Dabomb87 (
talk) 00:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC) Comments from
Dabomb87 (
talk ·
contribs):
reply
I'll try to come back later. Dabomb87 ( talk) 00:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC) reply