The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 23:49, 9 April 2015 (UTC) [1].[reply]
This article is a well-written article adhering to the point of view and was promoted to a Good Article status around 4 years ago. In my opinion, this article should be a featured article, having lots of references and adhering to its point of view. The Snowager-is awake 01:39, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The most cursory glance at the article indicates that, whatever its potential merits, it is quite unready for FAC in its present state. I'm not sure what the above nom statement is intended to mean, but I will remind the nominator that, when making this nomination, he/she edited a page which in large bolded letters instructed: "Wait! Before nominating an article please ensure that it meets all the featured article criteria" – which are then listed. You could hardly fail to notice this instruction, but you appear to have ignored it. You need to familiarise yourself with FAC procedures, and avoid impulse nominations of articles that you merely like the look of. If you are really interested in helping to develop this artice, you should nominate it for WP:Peer review, and perhaps canvass possible editors who might be interested in working on it, with a view to a FAC nomination at a later date. For the present it should be withdrawn. Brianboulton (talk) 17:57, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]