Talk:Peter Verhaegen/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Modussiccandi (talk · contribs) 14:19, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

I'll start reviewing this later today. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 14:19, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Criteria
Good Article Status - Review Criteria   		A good article is&mdash;  :
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

:
 * (a) ;
 * (b) ;
 * (c) ; and
 * (d).

:
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

. . :
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).



Review
 :</li>

<li>:</li>

<li>:</li>

<li>.</li>

<li>.</li> <li>:</li>

</ol>

Discussion
I've finished my review. I have also done a bit of easy-to-resovle copyediting. All that's left are some minor issues which I wanted to leave to you. Let me know when their done and I'll give the article a pass. Modussiccandi (talk) 21:05, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your review. I've attended to your comments. The only one I haven't is the one about splitting the Early life section. It's not a terribly long section as it stands, and having one section that is only one rather short paragraph doesn't seem like it would really benefit readers.  Ergo Sum  01:54, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, don't worry about the first section; I was quibbling at a very high level anyway and I agree there is no perfect solution. I will let the article through to GA status now. Well done and thank you for dealing with my comments so swiftly. Modussiccandi (talk) 09:51, 3 March 2021 (UTC)