Wikipedia:Peer review/London/archive3
Since the previous peer reviews (1 & 2), further improvements have been made in this article including better images, reduced length (with concise sections linking to more detailed sub-articles) and better sources. In theory, it should meet the featured article criteria, but any suggestions by fresh pairs of eyes before it is submitted would be very welcome. --Dave A 12:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- Lead seems a bit short for an article of this length. More footnote references might be required. — Wackymacs 10:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)