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

Nominator: Alexeyevitch (talk · contribs) 09:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Cactusisme (talk · contribs) 02:48, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. It is ready as it met the 6 criteria
2. It does not contain copyright violations
3. It does not need cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid.
4. It is stable

• Reference Taylor 1971 checks out on information but page numbers do not relate. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 04:48, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I've corrected it to "pages 11–12, 22". Alexeyevitch^(talk) 05:06, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• @Cactusisme: Do you have any other thoughts on the article? I would gladly appreciate any suggestions. :-) Alexeyevitch^(talk) 21:09, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Alexeyevitch Not for now, thanks. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:09, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Cactusisme: is this review going to progress? If not, I would simply close the review and wait for another one (see WP:GAN/I#N4a). I hope things will move along soon - please mention if you're still interested (or not interested) please let me know. Thanks. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 01:06, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexeyevitch You can close for now, I didn't notice any issues so far. Thanks for your time. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 01:13, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, will do. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 01:15, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]