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.
It is quite un-obvious why this article should have been nominated, as it appears to be decently structured, neutrally written, and very fully cited to reliable sources. Unless there are pressing but non-obvious reasons (please state them), I'd !vote Speedy Keep.
Chiswick Chap (
talk)
16:38, 6 November 2023 (UTC)reply
The discussion above 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.
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.
It is quite un-obvious why this article should have been nominated, as it appears to be decently structured, neutrally written, and very fully cited to reliable sources. Unless there are pressing but non-obvious reasons (please state them), I'd !vote Speedy Keep.
Chiswick Chap (
talk)
16:38, 6 November 2023 (UTC)reply
The discussion above 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.