| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'm trying to find ways to improve it further with a view to possibly nominating it for FA. Any suggestions, whether general or specific, would be much appreciated. Does the article cover the subject in a comprehensive way without going into unnecessary detail? Are the ref formats and other layout aspects okay, or could they be updated/improved? Any other ways the article could be made better? No suggestion is to big or too minor.
Thanks, Batard0 (talk) 05:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)