This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take it to GA status, I think that it meets the criteria (at least the a-ha part), but Im not so sure about the cover versions. I also wanted to check the grammar and the prose, since english is not my first language. Thanks,
Frcm1988 (
talk) 06:57, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
I have just a few comments about the introduction—commonly referred to as the "lead"—and the a-ha part of the article.
I've also made a few edits: [1], [2], [3], [4], and [5].
Huntthetroll ( talk) 18:17, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take it to GA status, I think that it meets the criteria (at least the a-ha part), but Im not so sure about the cover versions. I also wanted to check the grammar and the prose, since english is not my first language. Thanks,
Frcm1988 (
talk) 06:57, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
I have just a few comments about the introduction—commonly referred to as the "lead"—and the a-ha part of the article.
I've also made a few edits: [1], [2], [3], [4], and [5].
Huntthetroll ( talk) 18:17, 19 February 2009 (UTC)