GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: 3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk · contribs) 10:51, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A very good and thorough article, it seems. Some minor complaints:

@3E1I5S8B9RF7: I believe I've addressed the comments above, but let me know if something else still appears out of sorts here. Thank you again. --Drown Soda (talk) 23:50, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusion

[edit]

Overall, I think all my major issues were adressed. This article seems to be neutral and objectively written. I think it meets the GA criteria.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 10:58, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]