- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for August 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
gulen has driven attention after he voted top thinker in an online poll by the foreign policy magazine. i've listed this article for peer review because the article sounds like a battlefield between the gulen enemies and followers and never becomes stable. the neutral tone is not preferred by the enemies if it does not sound negative enough to satisfy their emotions. and followers wants more in some cases. the community oversee seems to be necessary to end this and stabilize the article. i posted a request on the 'request for comment' page before too, but did not get enough attention from there. i hope you have some time to review the article and provide some useful comments on the talk page.
Thanks, Philscirel (talk) 20:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Folks, don't bother with this request. This is the fourth time he is doing this (check the talk page). This user is swimming against the tide and it's time to take action. We can do the peer review after the article reaches neutrality. --Adoniscik(t, c) 21:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Agree with Adoniscik. This article is far from ready for peer review, don't waste your time. Arnoutf (talk) 16:50, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- I am archiving this as PR is not for dispute resolution per the PR guidelines. Sort this out on the talk page for the article, when consensus has been reached, please renominate it. Please see Wikipedia:Peer review/Request removal policy Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)