Wikia

Memory Alpha

Memory Alpha:Featured article nominations

Discuss96
37,200pages on
this wiki
Revision as of 16:59, May 20, 2006 by Defiant (Talk | contribs)

Template:FeatNom

Nominations without objections

Design patents

This is a self-nomination as I was the primary author of the article. I believe that it meets the criteria for being a featured article in that it is well-written, comprehensive as to its subject matter, accurate, and stable. It also has the distinction of being a subject not dealt with in any other Star Trek site I am aware of, so it is unique to Memory Alpha. I placed the article up for Peer Review, but after a week without suggestions I thought I'd just go for it. Thoughts? Aholland 18:17, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Support. This article is really well done, and I am a strong supporter of broadening our range of featured articles. Well done. Jaz talkUnited Federation of Planets logo 20:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. What does this mean (under the final patent): I suppose that Spock's body could be a "similar article" to a pen and pencil set, but it is a very odd designation, regardless. I think i missed the humor there; either way it's not quite the right POV. ;) --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 21:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
It was intended as humor, but I can understand your point. I'll see what I can do to keep the point while adjusting the POV. Aholland 01:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Really cool article and nicely done with the layout and information. My only nitpick with this is the relatively few links to the article. It seems that the only articles this is relevant for are the ones that directly link to it, which are in turn back linked from this article. It would be great if we could find a way to expand the linking to get this one more exposure. Good work. Logan 5 03:03, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. I didn't mean to be a spoilsport when I watered down Aholland's humor during my prior copyedits - it's really quite well done and (this is rare) something I doubt anyone has covered before - but I wanted to make sure it conformed to MA guidelines (and in the case I pointed out above, it went over my head as I've not seen the film in question - I get it now that you've reworded it though). Anyway, great example of how MA is a premiere source for Trek related info, right alongside Ex Astris Scientia. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 06:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Romulan history

A really good read! I think it fits all the criteria for featured status. --Defiant 16:59, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Nominations with objections

Explorers

It pneeds to be copy-edited since the paint is still wet, but I'm putting it up here in light of the lack of nominations at present. I didn't originally intend to feature it (more of a diversion over the past few days because work has been slow), but I think it meets the criteria. The only thing it might need is a bit more on the scientific (im)plausibility of the Bajoran lightship concept - what do you guys think? --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 20:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Comment. Nice work, but would the info on the lightship be more appropriate on the page about the lightship? Broik 22:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. I think we should feature Bajoran lightship (with some more work and information about the mechanics of course) instead. But that's just me. Makon 07:44, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Object. A far more comprehensive episode summary could be written up, the page needs more background information and perhaps one or two more images. Besides, I would like to note that I find it hardly necessary to nominate a page for featured status merely because there are no other nominations currently. It's not as if there must be nominations at all times. If there's no article up to featured status at present, then there must be none nominated. Ottens 09:33, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. For the record, I didn't nominate it solely to have something here, but I looked at the article, thought about nominating it, and figured now was a good time to do so. As far as the summary goes, have you seen the episode? There isn't exactly a lot of action - a longer summary is unnecessary and more pictures would be superfluous, because pictures in episode summaries should illustrate something words alone cannot describe. Background: Makon moved a bunch of info to the lightship page, which is why it looks more sparse now. I'll leave it up to the community to decide whether to move any of that back to the episode page and/or feature one or both of the pages in question. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 18:36, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. I realize that Ottens is entitled to an opinion, but I think the summary is as comprehensive as it needs to be. The tendency on the site to have summaries that take as long to read as to watch the actual show baffles me sometimes. As to the lightship, I agree that commentary on its scientific basis should be on the lightship page rather than the episode summary. Aholland 11:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I have no objections Majorthomme 06:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Support. Good summary length and solid background info make this a worthy episode article (though the ep. itself is pretty boring...zzzzzzzz) Logan 5 19:49, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki