Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/Prostitution
Prostitution[edit]
- Article is no longer a featured article.
Lots of information, but it reads like a list, no references, lead section includes huge amounts of definitions, poor section structure etc. Don't understand how it ever became a featured article. :ChrisG 22:34, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Remove. Also has no images. Can't find where the discussion for it was either. fac added 06:12, Apr 11, 2004 and then changed to featured on 04:32, Jun 21, 2004 according to talk page. Not sure whats gone on--Evil Monkey 23:43, Dec 5, 2004
- Remove. Seems generally NPOV, not the best prose, and the author seems prone to ramble. I hope other feature articles aren't this mediocre. Triped 05:15, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. I can't see too much wrong with it, although it could do with a bit of a brush-up. Note that it did have pictures when it was nominated - they may have been deleted for copyright reasons. Ambi 05:35, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Remove. Lots of good material, but it needs to be put together a bit more coherently. (It was promoted on 20 June 2004 by Snoyes. This is a diff between the current version and then version when it was promoted: [1] It had two images, Image:Gay brothel.png and Image:Street Prostitution.jpg.) -- ALoan (Talk) 15:46, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Remove. Some good stuff, but needs a fair bit of work to get up to standard, IMO. 1) Lead section is huge; it needs to be shorter and a discussion of terminology should probably be in its own section. 2) Needs illustration 3) Bullet-points are overused. — Matt 16:07, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Remove. Some good material, but also some very bad writing. Numerous tremendously POV and unencyclopedic comments. - Taxman 04:11, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Remove. Too many lists. Jacob1207 18:35, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Ahem. Pictures on "Prostitution"? Let's try to keep this encyclopedic. vLaDsINgEr 05:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)