I've listed this article for peer review because it has successfully gone through the Good Article review process, however is not yet at a standard to become a feature article. General comments would be appreciated, if you are willing to look for any other suggestions, that is welcome also. I am very active with this page if you need to contact me. @Casliber: and @Dweller: - if you are interested in continuing discussion begun at the Feature Article review, please feel welcome to do so. If not, I completely understand!
Thanks, SatDis (talk) 04:11, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
