Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of United States House committees

List of United States House committees

Promoted June 2005.

Where to start?

This list has way too many redlinks. There are 66 items in this list, and 38 redlinks. Doing the math reveals that this is actually a majority of the links on this page.
The References in the References section are actually explanatory footnotes.
It uses depreciated inline links as references.
How can a list that mentions in its lead that it is "an incomplete list" possibly be comprehensive?

Remove for all of these reasons. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 19:04, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove. Additionally, it could use some more explanatory text. -- Run e Welsh | ταλκ 19:29, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove. I've done a lot of work on this and related lists and I still agree that this article does not meet the standards for a featured list. I wish it did, and frankly I really wish this list could get improved. But until it does, it's not feature-worthy. —Markles 22:12, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove. I think enough's been said on the rationale for removal from the featured lists page, but …

Sorry for interrupting! I moved the following discussion to Talk:List of United States House committees, so it can be handled better there. —Markles 18:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

…we might consider removing some of the links which currently do not have articles. I realize we're giving people access to "the sum of all human knowledge" or however the dogma goes, but I wonder how much relevant and interesting material there is for the page about the United States House Resources Subcommittee on National Parks or who in their right mind would bother trying to type United States House Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, The Judiciary, District of Columbia into that little box. :) --Vedek Dukat ^Talk 05:02, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The difficulty is that a few of the subcommittees do have pages: removing the links to the others looks a bit selective, to game the criteria. -- ALoan (Talk) 09:53, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]