Peer review atmosphere of Venus article please

[mithridates]

Around September of last year I started the article on Wikipedia on the atmosphere of Venus and got it featured on the front for about 12 hours or so in the "did you know..." section. That section is for well-written new articles, not perfect, but fairly well referenced and generally worth reading. I'd like to see it become a featured article though (on the front page for a full day and right in the centre) and another Wikipedia user has shown an interest as well, so I thought I'd see what people on the board here think of the article. Here it is:<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Venus<br /><br />Basically, I'd like to know:<br />-Anything really interesting that the article has neglected?<br />-Anything inaccurate?<br />-Are there other references that could be used? The more references a Wikipedia article has the easier it is to pass the featured article review.<br /><br />If there are some good ideas here on how to improve the article then I'll link to the thread from the Wikipedia talk page so that other people can reference it too. If anyone feels like creating new diagrams or giving permission to use pertinent images that would be great too. I think the article's at about the halfway mark right now, not quite good enough to pass the nomination but getting there.<br /><br />(PS I know I started a thread requesting references for the colonization of Venus article before, but that's such an iffy concept at present that it's really hard to find good references to back anything up. Atmosphere of Venus is much easier to source.) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>----- </p><p>http://mithridates.blogspot.com</p> </div>

 

[nexium]

I made a less than brilliant coment in the discussion part. You should consider deleteting "easily" from the title, as the concensis seems to be, it is costly to extract hydrogen from sulpheric acid.<br />Sulpher dioxide H2S and water make sulpherous acid H2SO3. Neil

 

[robnissen]

Interesting article. I would change this sentence, however:<br /><br />"In spite of the harsh conditions on the surface, little of the planet has been explored and the extent to the tenacity of life on Earth itself has not yet been shown"<br /><br />I don't think it is "in spite of the harsh conditions," I think it hasn't been explored "BECAUSE of the harsh conditions." At least partly due to that.

 

[yevaud]

Well, they got one of the very first points made wrong. It's not "cloud structure" that prevents us from directly imaging the surface; it's optical density of the atmosphere, particularly the final 50-65 km down to the surface. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[mithridates]

Heh, oh yeah. I changed that as well as 'cloud structure' to 'optical density'.<br /><br />Any ideas for how the article could be made a bit longer? I would ideally like to see it about 30% - 50% larger than it is at present, long enough that even someone who knows quite a bit about the subject and also that the average person would be able to spend a good ten minutes looking over it and feel that much smarter afterwards. The article doesn't have any external links yet either, so a few really interesting ones to add to the bottom would be good as well. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>----- </p><p>http://mithridates.blogspot.com</p> </div>

 

[mithridates]

That reminds me, do we know what the sky would look like in the 50 - 60 km range in the cloudtops? As that is the place that has been proposed for human colonization I'm curious what it would actually look like there, whether it would be just a big sea of cloud above and below or whether you could actually see upward. Also what the sun would look like at that altitude. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>----- </p><p>http://mithridates.blogspot.com</p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

Oddly, at 50-60 km, the temperature profile of Venus' atmosphere shows the average temperature is around 0 degree C, which would be quite amenable. As far as optically, since that altitude is above most of the dense atmosphere, there would be a fair amount of visible light. Dim, but there.<br /><br />Below that altitude, the atmosphere becomes increasingly optically opaque to visible light, such that at the surface, there is none. It's pretty much all thermal and IR. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>