Wikipedia:Featured article review/Planetary habitability/archive1

Planetary habitability

Planetary habitability (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Planetary habitability

• Featured article review/Planetary habitability/archive1

User:Marskell inactive. Notified: WikiProjects Spaceflight and Astronomy
WP:URFA nomination

Review section

As noted on the talk page, there is uncited text throughout the article. Promoted in 2005, it is one of the oldest unreviewed featured articles. DrKiernan (talk) 10:03, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this would take a lot of work to bring up to current standards especially wrt verifiability. The templated table in the lead—{{Wpspace}}—is a true relic: we don't link to WikiProject space from articlespace (and it's a defunct WikiProject, at that). Maralia (talk) 02:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Despite the odd name, that's not a Wikiproject link. It's the name of that space colonization navbox template. That said, there's a lot of work to do here. There's substantial tracts of uncited text, and while some material has been updated as the science in this field advances, it's clear that it has been an uneven process, and a lot of relatively recent scholarship hasn't made its way here. The minimal coverage given to subsurface ocean environments (Enceladus, Europa) really highlights how much this landscape has changed in the last 10 years. I think it's possible to salvage this, but it'll need some dedicated work by editors both familiar with the required source material and with easy access to it (I'm likely neither for this one). Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 18:29, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Actually it did link to a WikiProject—someone just fixed that before you got there. In any case, your point about Enceladus is a good one; there is substantial work needed to bring this up to date. Maralia (talk) 15:41, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

FARC section

Issues raised in the review section include referencing and coverage. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:32, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

• Delist. Unsourced statements and paragraphs. Unclear statements tagged in March 2015. DrKiernan (talk) 09:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
• Delist – Among other issues, there has been enough unsourced content added that it would take a concerted effort to resolve. In its current form, the article does not satisfy the FA criteria. Praemonitus (talk) 16:25, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
• Delist - I appreciate the work that been done in the past month, but the article is still lacking in citations and in coverage. Maralia (talk) 23:02, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
• Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2015 (UTC)