Proofread by Galena11 – 23:23, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
grammar and spelling are not my strong suit. Would like to get this to a point where it could be nominated for FA without having to worry about grammar/spelling.Balloonman 15:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just received some important sources, so I'm going to be making a fairly big edit on this pageBalloonman 14:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I saw this yesterday and intended to edit today. Thanks for the notice. When do you anticipate finishing the re-write?Unimaginative Username 17:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No indication of substantial copyedit progress. Happy‑melon 15:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When there was no response back in May, this fell off of my radar screen. Struck the above comment. Unimaginative Username 06:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like there was a response on the article's talk page on June 19, then a neutrality improvement in October (last month). Looks stable now, so will do the c/e now. Unimaginative Username 20:34, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article seemed a bit truncated in spots, but what was there was c/e. There is a citation #5 missing, as flagged by a previous editor. Unimaginative Username 21:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
