| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has a very high importance and comparatively low quality. References need to be added and original research removed.
Thanks, Beware the Unknown (talk) 05:56, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This is not what Peer Reviews are for. The process isn't meant to invite collaborators, or those who wish to work on an article; see the top of the PR page for what it IS for: "Wikipedia's peer review process exposes articles to closer scrutiny from a broader group of editors, and is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work, often as a way of preparing a featured article candidate." You already know the numerous issues involved with this article, so try drumming up interest on the article's talk page, or at an affiliated Wikiproject. I suggest removing this PR for now, however, as there's currently a backlog to be dealt with. María (habla conmigo) 13:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Closed--Beware the Unknown (talk) 23:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)