Wikia

Memory Alpha

Changes: Memory Alpha:Featured article nominations

View source

Back to page

(Bell Riots: added comment)
(removing Bell Riots, unsuccessul nomination)
Line 3: Line 3:
   
 
==Nominations with objections==
 
==Nominations with objections==
===[[Bell Riots]]===
 
Just rewrote this page. I think it now stands a good chance of becoming a featured article, with, or without, a little more input. - [http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/User:Archduk3 <span style="color:#00ff00;">Archduk3:</span>][http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/User_talk:Archduk3 talk] 13:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 
 
:I must admit, I'm a little wary when I see a big content shuffle in an article that has basically been untouched since at least late 2006, immediately followed by a request to consider it one of the best articles that have been written. I think any "featured article" should have had community input and be relatively stable for a considerable amount of time - why don't we give it that time before applying for FA? -- [[User:Cid Highwind|Cid Highwind]] 14:22, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 
 
I must admit I felt a little wary about putting it up for FA status, but I rewrote the article for that very reason. I'm hoping for community input. I know someone out there has to hate my writing style or can catch some spelling or grammar error or that I would never see or just plan didn't like this episode. I want this article to be a FA, if the community can load on reasons not to do that now, then maybe it takes a few tries. I don't have an issue with this taking a few months to do, though I would hope for something more specific about the article then it only got rewritten yesterday. - [http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/User:Archduk3 <span style="color:#00ff00;">Archduk3:</span>][http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/User_talk:Archduk3 talk] 15:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 
 
:Perhaps a peer review, or a simple "request for comments" on the talk page, would have been better. I admit that those often don't get the number of responses the initiator would like to have, either, but at least it's not skipping some steps along the way. Regarding article stability, that's one of the few FA criteria that are explicitely given on [[Memory Alpha:Featured article criteria]] - so not exactly something totally "unspecific". -- [[User:Cid Highwind|Cid Highwind]] 15:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 
 
If you look at what was it was before, all I really did was expand on what was already there, and then add sections titles. The content itself wasn't really change all that much, just the wording, most of which was to add links to related articles, as all the pages on these episodes are missing basic interconnecting links. I don't think anyone has even been over these since 2006, if not earlier. Though I do see your point, I would still prefer to let this run it's course either way, as there aren't any other articles up for FA status right now. - [http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/User:Archduk3 <span style="color:#00ff00;">Archduk3:</span>][http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/User_talk:Archduk3 talk] 15:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 
 
::'''Comment:''' whether there are other FA-nominated articles or not is completely beside the point; each article should follow due process and common procedure. For ''this'' article, that would be a peer review, prior to possible FA nomination. --[[User:Defiant|Defiant]] 11:44, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 

Revision as of 07:58, September 30, 2009

Template:FeatNom

Nominations without objections

Nominations with objections

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki