"

 Re-review 

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:  
 
B. MoS compliance: 
 {{#if:The lead section is still a bit short and could use some expanding. WP:LEAD recommends that an article of about this size should have one to two paragraphs - I think this one can easily support two. You have done some good work in expanding what the lead covers.|The lead section is still a bit short and could use some expanding. WP:LEAD recommends that an article of about this size should have one to two paragraphs - I think this one can easily support two. You have done some good work in expanding what the lead covers.|}}
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:  
 
B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:  
 
C. No original research: 
 
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:  
 
B. Focused: 
 
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 
 
Is it stable?
 No edit wars, etc: 
 
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:  
 
B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 
 
Overall: 
Pass or Fail: 
 {{#if:Well done! This can now be called a Good Article! Keep up the good work, and consider a peer review, and this should be up to Featured Article Status soon! With so much history behind this market, it should definitely be an attainable goal.  (//c) |Well done! This can now be called a Good Article! Keep up the good work, and cons