Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review because…
As a whole, I think I have written and rewritten this article to the stage whereby the content should be balanced enough, and in principle, meets Wikipedia:Featured article criteria. However, I have a gut feeling that the current state prose may not pass the FA process as yet. I've done a Peer Review for this article previously, but it had yielded minimal outcomes. Hope to gather inputs so as to make this article truly FA worthy.
Thanks, Mr Tan (talk) 17:32, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
- Update: I am in the process of doing another round of copyediting and fact-checking. However, I apologise for the lackluster in this article due to my own real-life commitments. Will try to catch up very soon. In the meantime, any editors who maybe interested in posting comments and suggestions to improve the article are welcome. Thanks! Mr Tan (talk) 07:51, 10 February 2016 (UTC)