GA Review GA review see here for criteria It is reasonably well written a prose b MoS It is factually accurate and verifiable a references b citations to reliable sources c OR It is broad in its coverage a major aspects b focused It follows the neutral point of view policy a fair representation b all significant views It is stable It contains images where possible to illustrate the topic a tagged and captioned b lack of images does not in itself exclude GA c non free images have fair use rationales Overall a Pass Fail Well I think it s a very good article especially given the nature of the subject but there are some problems that prevent me from promoting this to GA status at the moment although nothing that I believe can t be done in seven days To begin with the lead needs some work Most importantly it needs to be expanded so that it at least touches upon covers somewhat summarizes every major aspect of the article itself Right now it s only two sentences long it should a through summary would expand to one maybe two full paragraphs In addition the list of his names is very awkward as it s sort of plunked down in the middle of the first sentence I would suggest either making his list of names its own sentence in the lead ie In his time he would have also been known by the courtesy name or if you feel up to it try and expand and integrate it into the body of the article itself The image in the infobox requires a caption that explains the context of the picture to someone who is just reading the article and doesn t click on the picture itself Is it a contemporary drawing of subject Was it drawn several centuries after by artists interpreting his story Is it a modern artists rendition of the subject Also is it known who drew it or not If so who was the artist You seem to have access to a lot of good reliable sources but a lot of things remain without in line citations in this article Since this is a historical figure it can not be assumed that anything in the article is common knowledge I mean of course anything about the subject of the article so everything has the potential to be challenged and thus everything should have an inline citation For example in Early life you stop citing after the citation for his father dying Since known history of this period and figure are by no means complete things like the year he passed his degree exam or that he was largely self taught need be directly pointed to in the works that you re citing so that they can be verified well at least by someone who has the books Also because of the lack of citations it s hard to tell if there s any original research here I suspect that since you re an established editor there s not but I have no way of verifying that without citations Also a non established editor could easily slip something in that sounds convincing but is completely false without citations its impossible to tell This is a problem in all of the main sections although apparentely the lead does not need to be fully cited although it can if you choose to do so Also all citations need to abide by the standards set out in WP CITET I think the prose is excellent baring a few tiny things I fixed myself but one thing I noticed is that the job of a collator of texts should either be briefly explained or wikilinked so that uncultured slobs like myself people who are unfamiliar with the term can get an idea of what it is Also all the ref tags should touch the punctuation word that comes before it I think I caught a lot but not all of that The legacy section could use some expansion if possible He seems like an important figure what other lasting impacts on contemporary and future culture did he have Who else cites him as an influence or an important figure in history You say that his poetry dealt with new themes never before touched on did his dealing of these themes encourage others to do so or no Did his themes last a long time or was it a passing fad Was he chas