Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to polish this article's contents. The article has reached the point where the information has been relatively stable since I first created it. I would eventually like to make the article of "Feature Article" quality, but I know it still has a ways to go. Any help for suggestions would be most appreciated.
Thanks, Cpkondas ( talk) 03:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Comments initially I think a peer review is a good idea, and then set your sights on good article nominations.
The Rambling Man ( talk) 16:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for all of the comments. I especially agree with your comment on the specialty camps and lack of references. I have begun work on clearing up those issues and then begin work on revising the page's lead and overall advert vibe that some of the article sections seem to portray.
Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to polish this article's contents. The article has reached the point where the information has been relatively stable since I first created it. I would eventually like to make the article of "Feature Article" quality, but I know it still has a ways to go. Any help for suggestions would be most appreciated.
Thanks, Cpkondas ( talk) 03:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Comments initially I think a peer review is a good idea, and then set your sights on good article nominations.
The Rambling Man ( talk) 16:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for all of the comments. I especially agree with your comment on the specialty camps and lack of references. I have begun work on clearing up those issues and then begin work on revising the page's lead and overall advert vibe that some of the article sections seem to portray.