The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not promoted --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 13:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hits all the criteria, though I suppose someone should check another published source to see if anything was left out. — db48x | Talk 19:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Relies almost entirely on one source. -Ed!^(talk)_{(Hall of Fame)} 14:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose As said above there are only two sources and one of those is used almost all the time. Also, none of the references are combined as they should be. There is no infobox, one is needed. The firing upon the Chinese junk needs to be cited. "De-escalation?" Surely there's a better word than that for the section title. Also, you have some works listed in Notes, but you don't have the full information in the Sources section. You should do that and use an abbreviated form, such as you did with the Smithies source. Overall, this article needs some serious work before it can become A-class, and I would recommend putting it through GAN first to get their input as well. Borg Sphere (talk) 22:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose For the reasons stated above. Cam (Chat) 05:12, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.