Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/Geologic age

Removed March 8, 2004 Raul654 22:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This articles dont make me especially proud. Not thats incorrect, its just not brilliant: much more can be done. Muriel 08:18, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I agree. Its incredibly short for such a broad topic. Sam Spade 08:27, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- To be fair, it used to have a big table with all the ages and IIRC more text - all of which has been farmed-off into other articles now. So at one time it was relatively brilliant, but it is no longer. Even if all the stuff I mentioned were still on that page, I would still vote for de-listing - I'm sure that will eventually happen to some entries we now think are brilliant if they don't continue to improve. As Wikipedia matures, we simply expect more. --mav 11:15, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Remove. Love the topic; hope that it one day makes it back to featured status. +sj + 04:54, 2004 Mar 27 (UTC)
Absurd to list this stub as a featured article. Tannin