Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch
This was passed a long time ago (2007) and I can't find the 2009 reassessment. I don't believe it currently meets our GA standards. The prose is poor, with disjointed sentences, short paragraphs and overly technical language. It needs additional referencing. The history section is poorly formatted and underwhelming. I will give it a proper review if editors are able to get it to a reasonable standard, otherwise it easily fails in its current state. AIRcorn  (talk) 22:39, 26 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Delisting No response to this here or at the article so delisting. AIRcorn  (talk) 03:30, 12 April 2018 (UTC) reply