Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has been GA-class for almost four years and I would like to know how to improve it so it can be ready for an FA nomination.

Thanks, –Dream out loud (talk) 18:30, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm doing a quick copy edit now. The article seems well written and comprehensive to me, and I don't believe it needs significant changes to pass FA, which is probably the next step to go through. Let me know when you nominate it so I can add my vote there. Lemurbaby (talk) 14:43, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• The script has spotted the following contractions: Can't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. -(t) Josve05a (c) 02:47, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]