I am nominating this featured article for review because of poor referencing (1c) and prose (1a). Numerous sections are in need of references, prose complaints date back several years. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:53, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
I agree with the nominator: this seems to fail the FA criteria on the referencing standards, haven't looked at the prose in detail. Overall it would take quite a bit of work to get this up to the sourcing requirements.
It fails 3c by quite a bit, I counted 12 or 13 unsourced paragraphs (not counting the lead)
Source reliability (1c) is an issue too. Likely non-high-quality reliable sources include: Think Biblically!: Recovering a Christian Worldview and Quotationspage.com.
Delist, Concerns have not been addressed. meshach (talk) 23:21, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
This isn't the point where we vote on listing/delisting just yet. This is the point where we discuss problems and suggest improvement. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:13, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Problems with 1a (prose), 2c (citations), and 3 (images problems). Looks like there is a large amount of work required to bring the article up to FA standards. meshach (talk) 01:10, 7 September 2012 (UTC)