Notable book per WP:NBOOK Criteria (1)[edit]

Notable book. Per WP:NBOOK Criteria number one (1). The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself.

Namely, Journal of Strategic Security, Publishers Weekly, and Kirkus Reviews. Sagecandor (talk) 23:13, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:An End to al-Qaeda/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 13:11, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:11, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:25, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sagecandor, are you planning to work on this? If not I'll fail the article in another week. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:12, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Mike Christie If you are willing to wait up to a week from now, I'll work on Sagecandor's remaining GANs. Bennv3771 (talk) 09:19, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bennv3771: sure. So long as work is going on, I'm happy to let the nominations stay open. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:11, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Christie: - I have addressed everything but the Harvard notes. I'm not familiar with that aspect at all. Could you explain what needs to be changed, or change it yourself and provide me a diff? Argento Surfer (talk) 14:44, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Argento Surfer I've fixed the Harvard anchors. Bennv3771 (talk) 14:59, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is just about there, though the prose is still a bit clunky in places. Promoting. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:05, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]