Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/Venus

Venus[edit]

Article is no longer a featured article.

I left a comment on the talk page a week ago detailing serious concerns. It has not been acknowledged, and no edits sinces have attempted to address the problems, so I am listing it here. Here's what I said:

I think this article falls well below the standards we expect of FAs these days. The lead section is inadequate, there is nothing at all about the exploration of Venus, precious little about volcanism and the theory of global crust recycling, inadequate referencing, and an enormous and not particularly relevant list of books that mention the planet that should be replaced by germane prose. To be honest I think the article needs a rewrite largely from scratch. Worldtraveller 15:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove, non-existent lead, outdated and insufficient reference system, massive accumulation of cruft, and it's not comprehensive. Should look a lot more like the about-to-be FA mercury.--nixie 06:17, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remove per nom. Fails FA criteria. Joelito (talk) 03:12, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remove per nom. Sorry to say, but this article is not nearly as good as it could be. Same is true for most of the other planet articles. Note that one reason for the current lack of comprehensiveness is that a lot of the information originally in the article has been moved to other articles.--Jyril 08:07, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remove as per nom and "nixie". -R. S. Shaw 23:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]