This article has previously failed an FA nomination and a GA nomination (also had a peer review). A lot of work has been done on the article since then and I think all the issues have been taken care of. I think it deserves a shot at FA again, so a thorough critical review will be apreciated.-- Konstable 14:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC) reply

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ  _t 01:46, 26 July 2006 (UTC) reply