GA Review

[edit]

Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 14:13, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Initial skim through

[edit]

Looks good so far. Quite a few red-line locations; and the in-line citations sparse in some sub-sections.Pyrotec (talk) 14:45, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA nomination – on hold

[edit]

Article is substantially compliant but there are a few areas needing attention, mostly the need for citations. Points needing attention are:

Overall a good article.Pyrotec (talk) 16:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Malleus Fatuorum

[edit]

--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 17:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response to comments. Thank you both for your comments which have helped to improve the article. I believe all issues raised above have been dealt with except the singular v plural concern. Looking at Quantock Hills which is already a GA and a close neighbour with similar characteristics, the range of hills is described in the plural - but I am willing to bow to expertise on which is correct. Please let me know of any further areas which you feel need improvement.— Rod talk 20:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA

[edit]

Congratulations and thanks for all your hard work. I've now assessed the article as GA class. Pyrotec (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]