Talk:Frank Tudor

Images
Who removed images without discussion and why? Timeshift (talk) 05:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry, that was my bad. I was rewriting the article in my sandbox so that this article wouldn't look like a sandbox and neglected to re-add the images. I will return at least one - a second may not fit. Littleteddy (roar!) 10:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

GAN
A short note about length: Tudor didn't have a very eventful or lengthly life. This is the reason for the short article. Littleteddy (roar!) 11:01, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Informal feedback: I took a look at the article, and am not hopeful that it will pass. Two things stand out to me: first, the lead section is not nearly thorough enough; it should give a pretty good overview of the subject, and clearly identify why he is noteworthy. Second, the article is essentially all based on one source. (Only a couple small details are cited to others.) Though this is not technically a disqualifier for GA, it seems likely to me that there are other sources available. I would prefer to see an article have a number of independent sources before a GA nom. Hope this is helpful, looks like an interesting guy! -Pete (talk) 19:01, 20 March 2008 (UTC)