The article was not promoted by User:Dana boomer 16:06, 1 March 2013 [1].
I am nominating this featured article for review because this article had been rated FA in September 2006. Since then, the article has undergone lots of edits. The article underwent an FA-review in late 2008 and was "Kept". However, since then, I observe that plenty of additions and removals have been made. Too much unsourced and POV stuff has been added that this time around, I don't think that the article satisfies the minimum sourcing criteria. Concerns have also been frequenty raised.-RaviMy Tea Kadai 03:42, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I cleaned up the long pending POV. Checking prose. Somebody please elaborate on the sourcinng problem other than formatting (that also will be done soon). Hometech (talk) 13:26, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. I see large paragraphs without citations or wikilinks (Religion section), one- and two-sentence paragraphs scattered about, and sloppy writing:
I could dig for more, but it wouldn't really be worthwhile until the sourcing is improved. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 02:50, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]