GA Review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Edwininlondon (talk · contribs) 23:10, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to take this one. Will have a good look tomorrow. Edwininlondon (talk) 23:10, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At first glance this appears to meet all the requirements. Let me start with some prose comments, none of them are important enough to make this nomination fail, they're just suggestions we can discuss:

That's all from me. Edwininlondon (talk) 18:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sportsfan77777:Where you waiting for me? Looks like you are nearly done addressing the points above. Do you have time to work on this? Edwininlondon (talk) 16:08, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, just hadn't got to it yet. Replied above, and thanks for the review! Sportsfan77777 (talk) 18:10, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, all looks good except for the sourcing of the parents's names. Edwininlondon (talk) 18:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This article now meets all the requirements for GA. Nice work! Edwininlondon (talk) 08:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]