I am going to have to fail this article, mainly due to referencing concerns. These are some of the issues I've found in a quick review of the article:

• Severe under-referencing. There are some sections that are completely unreferenced, as well as others that have many unreferenced paragraphs or sentences. There are multiple fact tags.
• It is recommended that pictures be staggered right and left to improve article flow. Also, galleries are discouraged. Pictures that truly improve the reader's understanding of the subject should be included in the main body of the text itself, in the appropriate section, and the rest removed. A link to the Commons category of the article can be added using the ((commonscat|Commons cat name)) template.
• The Further Reading section should be after the references section.
• The note in the Notes section should be explained further and referenced. If there is a discrepency in when he was born, this should definitely be explored in the article.
• You reference formatting needs quite a bit of work:
  • Web references should be formatted with publishers and access dates.
  • Books should be formatted with publishers and publication dates.
  • All references in each category (books, web, etc) should be formatted the same as each other.
• The Miscellaneous section should be taken apart and each section integrated with the rest of the article. The quotes should be integrated into the main text, and any quotes that don't fit transcluded to WikiQuotes. A link to the Wikiquotes can be added by using ((wikiquote|Wikiquote title))

These are just the issues I found on a quick run through of the article. As I have already stated, the referencing is the most serious issue preventing this article from becoming a GA. I have not done a thorough review of the article's prose, so there may be more issues that I have not listed above. If you have any questions, please let me know on my talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 00:30, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]