Thank you very much for editing the text - prose is among my weak traits and the main reason I don't review other GA nominations. --Gligan (talk) 14:31, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As I normally look at the good articles being nominated, particularly geography and earth sciences, I would like to the point out that the climate box is unsourced. There should be a numbered reference after the source (not simply "source=stringmeteo.org") pointing to the data directly (or at least point you to a navigation page that will display the climate data) as using that one takes you to the main page, not to the data. A good example would be this example where the numbered references take you either to the data directly or to a navigation page that will display the climate data. I suggest finding it or removing it. Normally I would fix this on my own but I don't understand any Bulgarian. Ssbbplayer (talk) 03:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What Ssbbplayer wants is the newest version of Kichukova M., 1983, Climate Guide of Bulgaria, National Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Volume 3. Clearly there is a newer volume as the data includes 1985. Just copy and paste the English of the newest version of that publication and I can help you with the citation formatting. Abel (talk) 16:38, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see now, the temperature data is from the climate guide and the precipitation data is from the website. Added a citation for the climate guide so that they are now both cited together.Abel (talk) 01:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for very much for improving the citation. And I would like to use the opportunity to once again express my gratitude for your work on the prose and, of course, for promoting the article. Best regards, --Gligan (talk) 16:45, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Done The prose is very good, just needs some minor, grammatical and such, editing. Abel (talk) 02:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
