(outdent) , thank you for the link. In the specific area of the section in question, here're my thoughts on the changes: 
 * Some seem uncontroversial (with references that seem to support the statements) 
 * Some of the language seems a bit promotional, and not really needed. 
 The challenge will be to update it in a neutral way, and not by just reverting edits. Perhaps the best approach would be to try a re-write here and get consensus.