# Talk:Thomas de Buittle

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
The prose could stand some further work before the article is promoted much beyond GA.  For example, the use of semicolons should be curtailed, and more caution should be utilized with commas.
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.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
I am placing the article on hold in the expectation that the problems mentioned above can be cleaned up. jackturner3 (talk) 15:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I've attempted to address thy concerns. Inform me if this isn't enough. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 01:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Based on these changes, I hereby promote this article -- jackturner3 (talk) 14:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)