Obviously people will read a book longer than 32kb; I'm not talking about book readership, I'm talking about encyclopaedia readership.  You shouldn't be writing something here that's attempting to compete with book readership.  We could argue the demographics inconclusively all day but I am still quite certain that there are really not many people out there who want to read 60kb of encyclopaedia article about a porn star.  95% of the web being porn doesn't actually mean there are lots of people out there crying out for a lengthy pseudo-encyclopaedic article on their favourite porn star.

You seem to be saying that you have to write a long article for it to become an FA.  This is not the case.  The shortest are considerably under 20kb.  Wouldn't you trade this massive article with star for five smaller ones with star?  Each of which being more likely to actually be read and appreciated?