comment on point of disagreement while worldwide coverage e g wp bias is not a ga requirement per se broad coverage is and that means the article addresses the main aspects of the topic exactly what this implies involves some subjective interpretation and judgment which is one reason that ga reviews are conducted by human beings rather than bots in some cases it may be reasonable to argue that an article about a topic of global interest in this case in most common law countries does not address the main aspects if it only concentrates on the north american case i suggest that the reviewer here applies his judgment if the outcome is disputed renomination or community gar are available to obtain input from other editors geometry guy