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

Reviewer:TCN7JM (talk·contribs)02:13, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Either tonight, if I'm up to it, or tomorrow. –TCN7JM02:13, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Let's get this started.

...or not. I have read the article twice and found no errors. So...

Final verdict

1. It isreasonably well written.

   a(prose): b(MoS forlead,layout,word choice,fiction, andlists):

2. It isfactually accurate andverifiable.

   a(reference section): b(citations toreliable sources): c(OR):

3. It isbroad in its coverage.

   a(major aspects): b(focused):

4. It follows theneutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It isstable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated byimages and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a(images are tagged and non-free content havefair use rationales): b(appropriate use withsuitable captions):

7. Overall: Congratulations on having the first article that I have passed without putting on hold.

   Pass/Fail: