I am glad to report that this article nomination for
good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of September 2, 2010, compares against the
six good article criteria:
1. Well written?: Yes, enough for GA, but going forward would suggest a
peer review, as well as soliciting help from previously uninvolved copyeditors.
2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited throughout.
3. Broad in coverage?: Good job including adequately fleshed out subsections, Production, Release, Reception, however perhaps going forward, the Reception subsection could be expanded a bit more.
4. Neutral point of view?: Neutral, NPOV presentation, matter-of-fact wording, good here.
5. Article stability? No major issues upon inspection of article edit history, or article talk page history and discussions.
6. Images?: One image used, appropriate fair use rationale given on image page. Checks out okay here.