Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…
I feel this article has reached a good stage. I feel the article has reached B grade, for LGBT studies, also how the article stands on Gender studies if the article needs more work and if so what could improve the article?
Thanks, Pennine rambler (talk) 20:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
- WP:LEAD says the article should be a standalone summary of the entire article's contents. The lede intro is therefore a bit too short right now. — Cirt (talk) 20:10, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
- thanks, I think it is to early for a peer review on reflection.--Pennine rambler (talk) 02:42, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
- I think the article is a bit young for a peer review as well. I copyedited it a bit though to help with the effort.Esprit15d • talk • contribs 19:47, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- thanks, I think it is to early for a peer review on reflection.--Pennine rambler (talk) 02:42, 15 October 2014 (UTC)