| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion is closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review because this page has been edited extensively after it was created by a sockfarm (now banned) in an effort to comply with Wiki's pov neutrality and paid contribution requirements. I would like some feedback on the neutrality of this article to maintain Wiki standards. I also hope to bring this bio up to a B-class and get the flag removed.
Thanks, TsunamiPrincess (talk) 05:57, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Comments
edit- I can see from the talkpage this ended up here as a goodfaith effort to improve the article. The article was in a bad state with the text not reflecting the sources and also some nonreliable sources, so I've simply cleaned it up rather than making detailed suggestions. As a user with a conflict of interest TsunamiPrincess you are probably better off just editing elsewhere or putting requests on the talkpage rather than editing directly. Yes things can take some time to implement, but as others have pointed out wikipedia is run by volunteers and everyone follows their own interests. If you wanted to suggest additions to the article, please come with reliable sources, reputable national newspapers would be a decent start. Mujinga (talk) 14:04, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Mujinga:Thank you for the assistance on the peer review and the advice. Is there further action that needs to be taken to close the review? TsunamiPrincess (talk) 23:56, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- I'd say you could leave it open for another two weeks if you like, maybe some other people will comment as well. As the proposer, you can close it at any time by following the steps at Wikipedia:Peer_review/guidelines#Step_4:_Closing_a_review. Mujinga (talk) 09:39, 13 February 2022 (UTC)