It's come to my attention that your way of "reviewing" articles on your Article Review blog is, to be blunt, extremely flawed and causing quite a stir with the other users.
From what I've seen, you've been marking articles as not meeting standards when in fact, they do meet Policy standards. Some of your reasoning behind such seem to stem from personal experience and opinions rather than what is written on the page as well. This is not a valid or rational way to mark pages. The policies have changed many times since you started in 2011, and may continue changing as we go on. I urge anyone who has any questions about them to speak up and ask before making assumptions; that includes other administrators.
There's also the matter of the "review", part. If you are going to call it "Article Review", you should actually take the time to sit down and give legitimate reviews on said articles. If you cannot do that then you can at the very, very least state your reasonings behind marking it for standards. And most importantly, I've seen next to no communication towards any of the users that own the pages in your list. Many have gotten marked without the owners ever even knowing. If you have the time to read through and mark pages, you have time to do at least this much.
As of right now you currently have five pages listed as non-standard, when all of them qualify. The list will be cleared. If you plan to keep doing this, I strongly suggest you take another look at the Policy Standards before continuing.