The article was kept by Casliber 14:22, 23 August 2016 (UTC) [1]. reply
The overcrowd of images out of context and the unsourced content are the most striking, of the content, there's almost nothing of politics and governments of the Monarch, instead there's a timeline of the UK in the period. Just my 2 cents. Frenditor ( talk) 03:00, 3 June 2016 (UTC) reply
The editor who started this was blocked as a sock. -- Rs chen 7754 14:52, 3 June 2016 (UTC) reply
Look, given that it's here, I can see a few things that need attending. There are some uncited sentences that I will tag, and "kaleidoscope of changing views" in the lead that should be easy to rephrase and dequote. Also the Legacy section has 3 paras that start, "George III..." If these get done I think I am happy to close. Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 09:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC) reply
Sigh - I suppose my points could be taken as stylistic issues - the quotes add a certain vividness of meaning and the three paras are hard to tweak..will close this as a keep in a sec. Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 14:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC) reply
The article was delisted by Casliber via FACBot ( talk) 4:37, 23 August 2016 (UTC) [2].
This is a 2007 promotion that is the work of a banned editor ( Sugar Bear) and has not really been maintained since that editor's departure. Specifically:
Since the principal editor of the page is banned, I'm hoping someone else who is familiar with the film can help get it back to standard. -- Laser brain (talk) 16:43, 17 June 2016 (UTC) reply
Curly Turkey, you're hot on animation and all it covers: is this one you can cover? - SchroCat ( talk) 15:12, 20 June 2016 (UTC) reply
Nothing happening here I see. Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 14:37, 23 August 2016 (UTC) reply
The article was delisted by Casliber via FACBot ( talk) 4:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC) [3].
I am nominating this featured article for review because it was promoted and reviewed last time 10 years ago. In the meanwhile the literature on Pius XII has developed quite a bit with important new work by authors such as David Kertzer (his recent Pulitzer awarded book on Pius XI includes much relevant material on Pius XII, especially his period as Nuncio and Camerlengo), Susan Zuccotti and Robert Ventresca, which has provided new critical perspectives on his relations with Mussolini and views on and actions regarding the Jews. The lack of integration of these new prominent pespectives made me placea NPOV tag on the article more than a year ago. No one has contested this criticism, and another editor arrived and expressed agreement that the article is currently not neutral but lacks engagement with relevant criticism. Hence I nominate the article to have its status as FA reviewed. I think that it currently fails both the requirements 1b, 1c and 1d - as well as probably having some MOS related issues (criterion 2c specifically) that should also be fixed for the status to be retained. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 10:59, 3 July 2016 (UTC) reply
Yeah, have to say these are clear cut grounds for delisting. Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 14:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC) reply
The article was delisted by Nikkimaria manually on 17:51, 26 November 2021 (UTC) [4]. reply
Per this discussion, this is a procedural FAR to reflect that this article was unilaterally delisted in September 2016, without a FAR, after this August 2016 AFD led to a merge. Because this FAR is for bookkeeping purposes only, I have not listed it at WP:FAR. If a @ WP:FAR coordinators: will close this without moving it to FAR archives (which would trigger FACbot and make a mess), I will then update Talk:Harold and Inge Marcus Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering and WP:FFA. @ Hog Farm: SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:33, 26 November 2021 (UTC) reply