After two weeks spent citing it up, adding over 140 new cites, I think it's nearly ready for FA. Is there anything we might be missing, though? Adam Cuerden ^talk 03:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply

What's the point of this? If its nearly ready for FA, get it ready and send it to FA. No point wasting people's time on Peer Review. pschemp | talk 04:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply

We'd like to be sure before we send it off, as we have a certain amount of finishing up to do involving templating footnotes anyway, and would rather not have nasty surprises once we hit FAC. Adam Cuerden ^talk 04:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Why don't you trust the editors on the page? They have FAC experience and know what is required. If you let them work, there won't be any nasty surprises. pschemp | talk 04:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply

It's not that I don't trust them, it's that I don't trust me, and Dave seems a little nervous. If you think something more informal will do fine, right'n. Adam Cuerden ^talk 04:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply

Wait and see what Mikker gives you. pschemp | talk 04:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC) reply