Knowledge

:Featured article candidates/Casino Royale (novel)/archive1 - Knowledge

Source 📝

719:: My concerns were largely addressed during the talk page review process. I have one point left over from that. In the "Anglo-American relations" section you refer to "the defections of two members of MI6 to the Soviet Union". Presumably these are Burgess and MacLean, and they should be named here. They have not been mentioned since the lead, and not everyone is sufficiently informed on Cold War treachery as to automatically identify them. That's all – an entertaining article that makes me (almost) want to read the book. 123:– As one of the informal peer reviewers (I took my jacket and tie off) I have found it no hardship at all to revisit this article for FAC. It can't have been easy to get the images, and the page is as well illustrated as I can imagine possible. The prose is a pleasure to read, the coverage comprehensive, the text well balanced and the research wide and thoroughly documented. Plainly meets all the FA criteria in my view. – 102:
character for television, radio, comic strip, video games, after shave, mobile phones, toys, etc, etc. For all that, it's a decent spy story by a first-time author; to paraphrase Fleming's description of his work, it may not be Literature with a capital L, but it is a 'thriller designed to be read as literature'. This article has benefitted from
1112:: in the Plot section, is the "The bitch is dead now." quote necessary? Seems oddly specific for a plot summary. I agree with the use of the "Opening lines" quotebox which illustrates the writing style as described in the Style section. But, unless that particular Plot quote is notable, I think it can be effectively summarized, " 1159:
It's an odd one, as I usually eschew quotes in plot sections (having taen all of Fleming's other books to GA a few years ago, I can't think I used a quote in the plot apart from this), but there is a hardness and finality to it that is diffcult to translate to encyclopaedic prose without losing the
234:
Is there any background information which might be directly related to his writing, had he expressed a previous interest in writing, or did he just begin with no experience? Later on you mention his brother being a writer which comes as a surprise. Something on the family's writing background might
101:
This was Ian Fleming's first stab at novel writing, undertaken during his annual two-month holiday in Jamaica (the lucky so-and-so) to kill time before his wedding. It's the novel that led to a 46 other Bond books by Fleming and others, a commercially successful film series, and adaptations of the
942:
Cheers Ian! Thanks for the tweaks: they're a great improvement. I've asked Crisco and Nikki to come back and comment on the two different parts, (which Crisco has now done so, since the edit conflict!) I've covered all the other points, except the sub-section one. I'm happy to remove them, if you
842:
OK: I've moved Style down the page and into its own section (above Themes): I thought it would look a little too short and a bit lost, but it doesn't, which is good. I'm also still sitting on the fence about the Themes sub-paras, but there's still time for someone to chip in one way or t'other to
1175:
Given some of the doubts Bond expressed earlier in the book about his job, this final hardness is his turn away from the Graham Greene-style philosophising secret agent, into the "blunt instrument" character that is shown in the following books. Thanks for your thought on this - it's always
242:
No other background on his writing, and the first he mentioned it was to do with wanting to do a spy book. I mulled about the family point, and if was the Fleming article I would have brought it up earlier, but as it's about the background to CR, I'm not sure it's as relevant. -
175:"The book was given broadly positive reviews by critics at the time and sold out in less than a month in the UK, although US sales upon release a year later were much slower." I think it might be better to mention the date of release here rather than in the next paragraph. 767:
Level of detail seems sufficient for FA. The only niggle I have is "Valentine Fleming, a wealthy banker and MP who died in action in May 1917". Most of us will know that means during World War I but if you could add where or in which battle, with a link, it'd help the
213: 990:- Uploaded by light show, who is currently under a CCI. What evidence do we have that this was first published in the US? Also, if we do keep this image, we should rework it to remove that God-awful autoleveling. More contrast is okay, but this is ridiculous. 599: 638:
With your explanation I'm happy with Griswold. For the locations, though, we can't assume that a Cambridge book is published in Cambridge - they do substantial publishing in New York. I would suggest including a location for that one, at least.
533:
All ddone, except those which are obvious from the title (Manchester University Press, etc), which I think is in line with the MoS: please let me know if consistency is preferrable, and I'l fill inthese off couple of gaps too. -
760:-- Recusing from coord duties, this hardly needs my support but I enjoyed doing the GA review (this being a personal favourite among the Fleming novels) and I was interested to see how Schro had developed and restructured it... 1202:
There's a common problem here that articles on topics likely to be familiar to many have: too much is assumed of the reader. Specifically, from the Plot section (and adding some things on problems for the reader):
1130:
Butting in, I see your point, OTOH it's a famous line in the Bond series (one of the few I recall making it intact into the 2006 film, great though the adaptation was IMO) so I'd be happy for it to stay. Cheers,
961:
Many thanks for your detailed tinkering, thoughts and comments - it's a much stronger piece now than it was. Hopefully I'll have another of the books to bring along in the not-too-distant future. Cheers -
843:
swing the vote. In regards to the Publication history, I've split the para in twain, to give one on the UK and one on the US, as I'd rather keep the history separate from the critics comments. Cheers -
1284:
All done, except where indicated, and except the last point, which is no, not overtly within the story itself. Many thanks for your thoughts here - they are very much appreciated. Cheers -
657:
Many thanks for the clarification: I've added locations for all of them, going on consistency throughout (it would have looked odd with only a few without the location in there). Cheers -
368:
Again something I've mulled over, and I'm still not sure which way to go on this. Perhaps we can leave it as is, until someone else agrees with you, and we can spin it at that point? -
1266:"as he recuperates in the hospital". Why not use British English, given the topic (cut "the")? The next sentence begins "When he is released from hospital", which is British English. 1260:"wins the first round, bankrupting Bond". Bankrupting him personally? I don't think that "bankrupt" is an accurate word for someone who loses all the money he enters a casino with. 1038:- Uploader has had one file deleted as a copyvio, and I'm not too sure I trust the others (other uploads include the logo of the fish sanctuary as an "own work") — 1029: 737:
Many thanks Brian. I'd added the names as a footnote, following your PR comments, but I've now raised these up into the body of the article. Thanks again -
384:
I'm not sure myself, I see the use in the sub section titles as they clearly define the themes, but they are relatively short, that was all I was saying!♦
40: 824:
itself, I see DrB's point about the smallish subsections, although I think only one is a single paragraph and therefore a bit of a MOS no-no (same with
598:
Source: Food, Culture and Society: An International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Volume 12, Number 2, June 2009. The question was also raised
336:"Casino Royale was written shortly after, " -not exactly really, seven years later, shortly after you'd think 1946-8 or something, perhaps reword. 1235:"The Deuxième Bureau and the CIA". Again, just stating what countries these are from would help, as the reader wouldn't have to follow the links. 1335: 30: 17: 1346: 1069: 911:
Several images have been added since the GA review so I'd prefer to see say Nikki or Crisco review licensing before I add my full support.
1365: 1322: 1308: 1293: 1278: 1251: 1226: 1185: 1154: 1140: 1125: 1104: 1081: 1047: 1014: 971: 952: 927: 896: 882: 852: 837: 803: 746: 728: 707: 689: 666: 648: 629: 611: 565: 543: 508: 487: 469: 448: 422: 392: 377: 352: 322: 297: 267: 252: 225: 191: 155: 138: 115: 93: 65: 794:; Doc Blofeld suggested that I should perhaps get rid of most of the sub-sections. Would you agree that this may be a way to go...? - 216:; I've left them in, as otherwise he could be a non-English manager, if you want to deliberately misread it! Nothing on Kelmsey. - 987: 809: 591: 1072:). I've taken out the Goldeneye image - it was a nice to have, but don't add enough to push for a non-free pass on it. Cheers - 771:
Structure-wise I think there's room for improvement. If you're using subsections it seems to make sense to have two or more but
1217:
I really do think the protagonist is well known enough not to need further introduction, and the context makes it doubly so. -
1001:
a photo from the same session, but uncropped. When you zoom it, there's a 1946 RKO copyright at lower right. These are from
828:
for that matter) -- call me neutral on this one, I won't complain if you leave as is or if you lose the subheaders. Cheers,
575: 620:
All done, thanks Nikkimaria. Happy to talk further on the Griswold point, if you think there is still an issue with it. -
406:"Concluding, Ross thought that... ", maybe just "He concluded that the book was both "exciting and extremely civilized". 146:
Many thanks, as always, for your excellent comments at PR and here. They are appreciated, as they always are. Cheers -
288:
I thought about that, but as the casino was the focus of the activity, I thought tat was the best one to go with. -
1023: 783:
for the next section heading, since surely the writing, which you've described earlier, is part of the "creation".
103: 1035: 579: 205:"Foreign Manager in the Kemsley newspaper group," -is the capitalisation official here? No article on Kemsley? 106:
from a high-quality cast list, following a recent re-write of a 2011 GA. All comments and thoughts welcome. -
1361: 1263:"In the midst of the torture session". Wouldn't "during" be more accurate, if the torture ended soon after? 724: 1150: 1100: 1043: 685: 75: 1010: 998: 787:
mightn't be ideal but I think it's better, or you might be able to come up with something else again.
644: 561: 1304: 1274: 1121: 943:
think it would be an improvement, especially given Doc Blofeld's suggestion on this point above. -
361:
Do you think it might read better without the fairly short sections or is it essential for clarity?
131: 1065: 1006: 820:, as you see fit -- but feel free to see if that offends any of the other reviewers... ;-) As for 1357: 1318: 1289: 1247: 1222: 1181: 1136: 1077: 967: 948: 937: 923: 892: 878: 848: 833: 799: 742: 703: 662: 625: 607: 539: 483: 465: 418: 373: 348: 318: 293: 248: 221: 187: 151: 111: 89: 53: 887:
Yes - it doesn't need to be there, as backgrond can cover the whole lot, so its now trimmed. -
720: 1145:
Agree with Ian. Very important part of characterization there. "Cold" just doesn't cut it. —
1339: 1146: 1096: 1061: 1039: 681: 501: 441: 385: 260: 61: 640: 557: 1338:
has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see
873:, but supporting regardless, especially now image and source reviews look okay. Cheers, 1300: 1270: 1117: 587: 126: 1242:
I have added for the Deuxième, but not the CIA, which I think is well enough known. -
1314: 1285: 1243: 1218: 1177: 1132: 1073: 963: 944: 919: 888: 874: 844: 829: 795: 791: 738: 699: 658: 621: 603: 553: 535: 479: 461: 414: 369: 344: 314: 289: 244: 217: 183: 147: 107: 85: 594:
as a serious source and has been cited in academic works, such as Biddulph, Edward
586:
and holders of the copyright to all Fleming's works. The work has been accepted by
698:
Many thanks Crisco - your comments at PR were spot on, as always. Thanks again -
1353: 583: 57: 1160:
impact. If you look at the two versions side by side you'll see wht I mean:
1068:, who is much more reliable with their sourcing of images (the new file is 914:
Likewise I'll hold off full support until Nikki has signed off on sources.
1210:"assigns James Bond, 007". Who is this person? What does "007" signify? 520:
Be consistent in whether you include accessdates for online newspapers
1176:
interesting to have to challenge one's own thought process! Cheers -
590:, continuation author of Bond novels from 1997 to 2003 and writer of 39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
1299:
I'm content with what's been done following my comments. Thanks.
596:"Bond Was Not a Gourmet": An Archaeology of James Bond's Diet 1064:. I've swapped out the light show image for one uploaded by 460:, then I've re-worked the couple of sentences around it. - 1207:"M, the Head of the Secret Service". Which secret service? 1169:
coldly telling his contact of Lynd's duplicity and death.
779:. Further, I wonder if there isn't something superior to 1114:...Bond coldly informs...of Lynd's duplicity and death. 68: 556:, what makes Griswold a high-quality reliable source? 1164:
coldly telling his contact, "The bitch is dead now."
1313:Many thanks, EddieHugh, much appreciated. Cheers - 1373:The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 602:, who are happy enough, given the background). – 259:Yes, you don't want to go into too much anyway.♦ 808:Okay, I checked out a few novel FAs, as well as 526:Be consistent in whether books include locations 764:Prose looks good, I just tweaked a word or two. 478:Many thanks Doc - all sorted, I hope! Cheers - 43:. No further edits should be made to this page. 1269:Any indication of when the story takes place? 1030:File:Vice Admiral Godfrey WWII IWM A 20777.jpg 1379:No further edits should be made to this page. 1352:template in place on the talk page until the 680:per my talk page review. Good work, Schro! — 29:The following is an archived discussion of a 8: 1032:- Would be nice to explicitly mark the years 816:out into its own section, before or after 41:Knowledge talk:Featured article candidates 523:FN88: the bank is a publisher, not a work 997:I don't think we can keep this photo. 163:Looks in good nick. Some minor points: 1168: 1163: 812:. I think you could afford to break 281:Perhaps link Estoril the town itself. 18:Knowledge:Featured article candidates 7: 1070:File:Hoagy Carmichael circa 1953.JPG 24: 574:Griswold's work is classed as an 436:The long sentence is rather long! 235:be good at an earlier stage here. 988:File:Hoagy Carmichael - 1947.jpg 869:seems to lead more naturally to 592:The James Bond Bedside Companion 306:Do you need to link Bulgarians? 1: 1366:22:27, 14 February 2015 (UTC) 1323:12:56, 11 February 2015 (UTC) 1309:12:45, 11 February 2015 (UTC) 172:Why "continuation" in quotes? 66:22:27, 14 February 2015 (UTC) 1294:22:23, 9 February 2015 (UTC) 1279:20:09, 9 February 2015 (UTC) 1252:22:23, 9 February 2015 (UTC) 1227:22:23, 9 February 2015 (UTC) 1186:06:29, 7 February 2015 (UTC) 1155:01:31, 7 February 2015 (UTC) 1141:01:27, 7 February 2015 (UTC) 1126:23:42, 6 February 2015 (UTC) 1105:22:19, 3 February 2015 (UTC) 1082:14:31, 3 February 2015 (UTC) 1048:14:10, 3 February 2015 (UTC) 1015:15:17, 3 February 2015 (UTC) 972:06:17, 7 February 2015 (UTC) 953:14:18, 3 February 2015 (UTC) 928:13:03, 3 February 2015 (UTC) 918:Well done as usual. Cheers, 897:06:17, 7 February 2015 (UTC) 883:01:27, 7 February 2015 (UTC) 853:14:12, 5 February 2015 (UTC) 838:07:13, 5 February 2015 (UTC) 804:14:18, 3 February 2015 (UTC) 747:22:53, 2 February 2015 (UTC) 729:22:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC) 708:20:31, 1 February 2015 (UTC) 690:17:47, 1 February 2015 (UTC) 667:17:05, 3 February 2015 (UTC) 649:16:56, 3 February 2015 (UTC) 630:19:15, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 612:19:06, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 600:Reliable sources noticeboard 566:17:11, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 544:19:15, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 509:20:51, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 488:20:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 470:20:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 449:15:28, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 423:20:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 393:20:51, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 378:20:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 353:20:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 323:20:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 298:20:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 268:20:55, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 253:20:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 226:20:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 212:A Google Books search shows 192:20:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 156:20:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 139:12:49, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 116:12:04, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 94:12:04, 31 January 2015 (UTC) 1347:featured article candidates 1003:The Best Years of Our Lives 31:featured article nomination 1396: 1024:File:CasinoRoyaleCover.jpg 857:Fine by me. I wonder if 1376:Please do not modify it. 1036:File:GoldeneyeEstate.jpg 582:, the family company of 580:Ian Fleming Publications 36:Please do not modify it. 1198:Comments from EddieHugh 576:approved reference book 554:self-publishing company 552:Since AuthorHouse is a 777:Background and writing 516:- spotchecks not done 343:shortly now struck. - 182:Yep - all done now. - 859:Backgound and writing 76:Casino Royale (novel) 826:Publication history 775:is the only one in 941: 313:Nope! Now gone - 97: 1387: 1378: 1351: 1345: 1342:, and leave the 935: 506: 458:The Long Goodbye 446: 390: 265: 136: 134: 129: 82: 48:The article was 38: 1395: 1394: 1390: 1389: 1388: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1374: 1349: 1343: 1093:Images are okay 861:could lose the 502: 442: 386: 261: 132: 127: 125: 79: 34: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1393: 1391: 1382: 1381: 1369: 1368: 1356:goes through. 1328: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1282: 1281: 1267: 1264: 1261: 1257: 1256: 1255: 1254: 1237: 1236: 1232: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1212: 1211: 1208: 1195: 1194: 1193: 1192: 1191: 1190: 1189: 1188: 1173: 1172: 1171: 1166: 1107: 1089: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1053: 1052: 1051: 1050: 1033: 1027: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 992: 991: 982: 981: 975: 974: 958: 957: 956: 955: 916: 915: 912: 909: 908: 907: 906: 905: 904: 903: 902: 901: 900: 899: 769: 765: 752: 751: 750: 749: 732: 731: 713: 712: 711: 710: 693: 692: 674: 673: 672: 671: 670: 669: 652: 651: 633: 632: 617: 616: 615: 614: 588:Raymond Benson 569: 568: 549: 548: 547: 546: 528: 527: 524: 521: 495: 494: 493: 492: 491: 490: 473: 472: 438: 437: 433: 432: 428: 427: 426: 425: 408: 407: 403: 402: 398: 397: 396: 395: 381: 380: 363: 362: 358: 357: 356: 355: 338: 337: 333: 332: 328: 327: 326: 325: 308: 307: 303: 302: 301: 300: 283: 282: 278: 277: 273: 272: 271: 270: 256: 255: 237: 236: 231: 230: 229: 228: 207: 206: 202: 201: 197: 196: 195: 194: 177: 176: 173: 169: 168: 161: 160: 159: 158: 104:an informal PR 99: 98: 84:Nominator(s): 78: 73: 72: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1392: 1380: 1377: 1371: 1370: 1367: 1363: 1359: 1358:Graham Beards 1355: 1348: 1341: 1337: 1333: 1330: 1329: 1324: 1320: 1316: 1312: 1311: 1310: 1306: 1302: 1298: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1291: 1287: 1280: 1276: 1272: 1268: 1265: 1262: 1259: 1258: 1253: 1249: 1245: 1241: 1240: 1239: 1238: 1234: 1233: 1228: 1224: 1220: 1216: 1215: 1214: 1213: 1209: 1206: 1205: 1204: 1200: 1199: 1187: 1183: 1179: 1174: 1170: 1167: 1165: 1162: 1161: 1158: 1157: 1156: 1152: 1148: 1144: 1143: 1142: 1138: 1134: 1129: 1128: 1127: 1123: 1119: 1115: 1111: 1108: 1106: 1102: 1098: 1094: 1091: 1090: 1083: 1079: 1075: 1071: 1067: 1063: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1049: 1045: 1041: 1037: 1034: 1031: 1028: 1025: 1022: 1021: 1016: 1012: 1008: 1004: 1000: 996: 995: 994: 993: 989: 986: 985: 984: 983: 980: 977: 976: 973: 969: 965: 960: 959: 954: 950: 946: 939: 938:edit conflict 934: 933: 932: 931: 930: 929: 925: 921: 913: 910: 898: 894: 890: 886: 885: 884: 880: 876: 872: 868: 864: 860: 856: 855: 854: 850: 846: 841: 840: 839: 835: 831: 827: 823: 819: 815: 811: 807: 806: 805: 801: 797: 793: 789: 788: 786: 782: 778: 774: 770: 766: 763: 762: 761: 759: 758: 748: 744: 740: 736: 735: 734: 733: 730: 726: 722: 718: 715: 714: 709: 705: 701: 697: 696: 695: 694: 691: 687: 683: 679: 676: 675: 668: 664: 660: 656: 655: 654: 653: 650: 646: 642: 637: 636: 635: 634: 631: 627: 623: 619: 618: 613: 609: 605: 601: 597: 593: 589: 585: 581: 577: 573: 572: 571: 570: 567: 563: 559: 555: 551: 550: 545: 541: 537: 532: 531: 530: 529: 525: 522: 519: 518: 517: 515: 514:Source review 511: 510: 507: 505: 499: 489: 485: 481: 477: 476: 475: 474: 471: 467: 463: 459: 455: 454: 453: 452: 451: 450: 447: 445: 435: 434: 430: 429: 424: 420: 416: 412: 411: 410: 409: 405: 404: 400: 399: 394: 391: 389: 383: 382: 379: 375: 371: 367: 366: 365: 364: 360: 359: 354: 350: 346: 342: 341: 340: 339: 335: 334: 330: 329: 324: 320: 316: 312: 311: 310: 309: 305: 304: 299: 295: 291: 287: 286: 285: 284: 280: 279: 275: 274: 269: 266: 264: 258: 257: 254: 250: 246: 241: 240: 239: 238: 233: 232: 227: 223: 219: 215: 214:mixed results 211: 210: 209: 208: 204: 203: 199: 198: 193: 189: 185: 181: 180: 179: 178: 174: 171: 170: 166: 165: 164: 157: 153: 149: 145: 144: 143: 142: 141: 140: 137: 135: 130: 122: 118: 117: 113: 109: 105: 96: 95: 91: 87: 81: 80: 77: 74: 71: 69: 67: 63: 59: 55: 54:Graham Beards 51: 44: 42: 37: 32: 27: 26: 19: 1375: 1372: 1332:Closing note 1331: 1283: 1201: 1197: 1196: 1113: 1109: 1092: 1002: 979:Image review 978: 917: 870: 866: 862: 858: 825: 821: 817: 813: 784: 780: 776: 772: 768:uninitiated. 756: 754: 753: 721:Brianboulton 716: 677: 595: 513: 512: 503: 500:Great job!♦ 497: 496: 457: 456:If you mean 443: 439: 413:Yep, done - 387: 262: 162: 124: 120: 119: 100: 83: 49: 47: 35: 28: 1147:Crisco 1492 1097:Crisco 1492 1062:Crisco 1492 1040:Crisco 1492 871:Development 863:and writing 785:Development 682:Crisco 1492 584:Ian Fleming 504:Dr. Blofeld 444:Dr. Blofeld 431:Adaptations 388:Dr. Blofeld 263:Dr. Blofeld 867:Background 810:MOS/Novels 641:Nikkimaria 558:Nikkimaria 200:Background 1340:WP:FAC/ar 1336:candidate 1301:EddieHugh 1271:EddieHugh 401:Reception 128:Tim riley 1334:: This 1315:SchroCat 1286:SchroCat 1244:SchroCat 1219:SchroCat 1178:SchroCat 1133:Ian Rose 1110:Question 1074:SchroCat 964:SchroCat 945:SchroCat 920:Ian Rose 889:SchroCat 875:Ian Rose 845:SchroCat 830:Ian Rose 796:SchroCat 792:Ian Rose 781:Creation 757:Comments 755:Support 739:SchroCat 700:SchroCat 659:SchroCat 622:SchroCat 604:SchroCat 536:SchroCat 480:SchroCat 462:SchroCat 415:SchroCat 370:SchroCat 345:SchroCat 315:SchroCat 290:SchroCat 276:Creation 245:SchroCat 218:SchroCat 184:SchroCat 148:SchroCat 108:SchroCat 86:SchroCat 50:promoted 1118:maclean 1066:We hope 1060:Cheers 1007:We hope 790:Thanks 717:Support 678:Support 498:Support 121:Support 1026:- Fine 999:Here's 865:since 822:Themes 818:Themes 331:Themes 58:FACBot 814:Style 773:Style 16:< 1362:talk 1319:talk 1305:talk 1290:talk 1275:talk 1248:talk 1223:talk 1182:talk 1151:talk 1137:talk 1122:talk 1116:" -- 1101:talk 1078:talk 1044:talk 1011:talk 968:talk 949:talk 924:talk 893:talk 879:talk 849:talk 834:talk 800:talk 743:talk 725:talk 704:talk 686:talk 663:talk 645:talk 626:talk 608:talk 562:talk 540:talk 484:talk 466:talk 419:talk 374:talk 349:talk 319:talk 294:talk 249:talk 222:talk 188:talk 167:Lede 152:talk 133:talk 112:talk 90:talk 62:talk 56:via 1354:bot 578:by 52:by 1364:) 1350:}} 1344:{{ 1321:) 1307:) 1292:) 1277:) 1250:) 1225:) 1184:) 1153:) 1139:) 1124:) 1103:) 1095:— 1080:) 1046:) 1013:) 1005:. 970:) 951:) 926:) 895:) 881:) 851:) 836:) 802:) 745:) 727:) 706:) 688:) 665:) 647:) 628:) 610:) 564:) 542:) 486:) 468:) 440:♦ 421:) 376:) 351:) 321:) 296:) 251:) 224:) 190:) 154:) 114:) 92:) 70:. 64:) 33:. 1360:( 1317:( 1303:( 1288:( 1273:( 1246:( 1221:( 1180:( 1149:( 1135:( 1120:( 1099:( 1076:( 1042:( 1009:( 966:( 947:( 940:) 936:( 922:( 891:( 877:( 847:( 832:( 798:( 741:( 723:( 702:( 684:( 661:( 643:( 624:( 606:( 560:( 538:( 482:( 464:( 417:( 372:( 347:( 317:( 292:( 247:( 220:( 186:( 150:( 110:( 88:( 60:(

Index

Knowledge:Featured article candidates
featured article nomination
Knowledge talk:Featured article candidates
Graham Beards
FACBot
talk
22:27, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Casino Royale (novel)
SchroCat
talk
12:04, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
an informal PR
SchroCat
talk
12:04, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Tim riley
talk
12:49, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
SchroCat
talk
20:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
SchroCat
talk
20:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
mixed results
SchroCat
talk
20:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
SchroCat

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.