This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has reached a stage where if other modifications are made to the article it will begin to ruin what appears to be a strong and quality article.
Thanks, Mcwesty ( talk) 13:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)\
Ruhrfisch comments: I am reallly not sure I understand the comment above - this is a good start, but it is not a Good Article and nowhere near WP:FA yet. Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement (and hopefully not ruin). If you want more comments, please ask here.
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments, I had a feeling the references where going to be an outstanding problem. I'll try and make the neccessary changes when I can find the time.
What I meant in my commment is that people are continuing to make edits to the article, and if that continues as it has been the article could very easily be ruined from "over editing".
Thanks, Mcwesty ( talk) 17:04, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has reached a stage where if other modifications are made to the article it will begin to ruin what appears to be a strong and quality article.
Thanks, Mcwesty ( talk) 13:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)\
Ruhrfisch comments: I am reallly not sure I understand the comment above - this is a good start, but it is not a Good Article and nowhere near WP:FA yet. Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement (and hopefully not ruin). If you want more comments, please ask here.
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments, I had a feeling the references where going to be an outstanding problem. I'll try and make the neccessary changes when I can find the time.
What I meant in my commment is that people are continuing to make edits to the article, and if that continues as it has been the article could very easily be ruined from "over editing".
Thanks, Mcwesty ( talk) 17:04, 26 July 2008 (UTC)