Talk:The Soxaholix

Editorial Review
One item which I will throw out as the first change that will probably be worth making is to put all of the citations into format. I was just getting used to the criteria for this format at the time that I introduced it to some of the citations and not others. Any help on these citations would be appreciated. ju66l3r 18:57, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Two questions arising from Peer review so far: A few things to think about, in order to reach GA status. ju66l3r 14:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) The characters need to be described from an "out of universe" perspective (see the added tag).
 * 2) General questionability of the reliable sources, including a more problematic description of the WSJ article as a copyright violation (I personally do not see it as such, but this was the reviewer's comment).


 * I have fixed the perspective of the characters section and removed the tag. I have also replaced any links to the WSJ article causing potential copyvio problems.  ju66l3r 18:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Now that the Peer Review is archived, I'm submitting this article for GA status. ju66l3r 18:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

GA review
This is very close to good article status. The only issue that I can see is that the images tagged for fair use lack a detailed fair use rationale on their discussion page (further information on Help:Image page). If this problem can be resolved I believe the article is ready to be passed, please leave a note on my talk page if this is done. Seraphimblade 04:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Exactly what was needed. Excellent work and glad to pass it. Seraphimblade 03:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)