Wikipedia:Peer review/William Utermohlen/archive2

William Utermohlen


I've listed this article for peer review because I want to take this article to FA status after the previous FAC was withdrawn for comprehensiveness issues.

Thanks, Realmaxxver (talk) 15:13, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Realmaxxver I'm sorry no one has answered this PR so far. If you incorporate the sources mentioned in the last FAC and reduce the use of his wife's publications, then go back to FAC, I think the chances of success are pretty good. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  18:59, 5 February 2022 (UTC)