Featured Article #1, all the way back in 2004. I think this one has aged pretty well overall, though there is room for more bg info, so long as we aren't just gong to duplicate stuff directly from the episode articles. I'll have some time to further investigation that matter and do a once over on the text for a few minor things in the next few days, so I'm only tentatively '''supporting''' this for now. The text of the blurb should also most likely be replaced with a section of the article itself, instead of summarizing the whole thing. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 07:17, February 19, 2012 (UTC)
−
−
Updated the text of the [[Template:FA/Dominion War|blurb]] to be the opening of the article and did a once over on the text of that as well. I think the final paragraph in the "End of the war" section needs some more work, and I'll be getting to that shortly unless someone beats me to it. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 21:32, February 19, 2012 (UTC)
−
−
*'''Support''' reconfirmation-I like the readability of a larger event in the ''Star Trek'' history...Sure enough, as a non-native English speaker some once-over concerning grammar, syntax and such might be in order, but I consider that minor. The one thing I might suggest is, is it possible to integrate the logos into the belligerents side-bar? (I'd like one side-bar instead of two) Mind you, this is not to be interpreted as "hold", "oppose" or otherwise, just a suggestion, even if not followed upon my '''support''' stands...[[User:Sennim|Sennim]] 22:52, February 24, 2012 (UTC)
−
−
*'''Support''' reconfirmation- The article still holds up. Also there has been little additional information added to the canon, so it should continue to age well. It's possible that more detail may need to be added to evoke the feel of a Wikipedia article of similar subject matter. But conciseness has it's place and it is also possible, that it's just as well to leave it as it is. As of the date of this remark I see no problems with it. [[User:Rayfire|Rayfire]] 23:31, March 6, 2012 (UTC)
−
−
*'''Support''' reconfirmation. Still seems like an excellent article.--[[User:31dot|31dot]] 00:02, March 7, 2012 (UTC)
−
−
*I'll move my '''support''' up from tentative to full. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 09:44, March 7, 2012 (UTC)
Every two years a featured article will need to be brought up for reconfirmation, to ensure it is still an example of Memory Alpha's best work. Featured articles more than two years old will be automatically added to the list to the right.
It is expected that these articles will have undergone revisions over that time to keep them up to date, but it's important to make sure that these revisions have maintained the quality expected of a featured article.
Before starting a reconfirmation discussion, please make sure you are familiar with the reconfirmation policy. For past reconfirmation discussions, please see the archive.
Reconfirmations can be started by beginning a new discussion under either "Nominations without objections", for articles you support or have no preference to, or "Nominations with objections", for articles you oppose, with a heading containing a link back to the article you want to suggest. Early reconfirmations should be under the section of the same name. Reconfirmations should display, and have a link to, the blurb used on the main page, just add {{Blurb|ARTICLE NAME}} before the discussion, and it's generally a good idea to link to the FA history on the article's talk page as well. If you have a preference on the article, please briefly state why.
Once this is done, a notice that the article is up for reconfirmation should be added to the article in question by inserting {{faupdate}} at the top of the page, above any other templates. Early reconfirmations should use the {{farc}} template.
When you are commenting on a reconfirmation, please take the time to read the entire article before you decide whether to Support or Oppose it. When supporting or opposing an article, please use a bullet point (by adding a * before your comment) without any indent so these will be easy to find later. General comments should be indented as usual, and, as always, please sign your nominations and comments with "~~~~".
About → Policies and guidelines → FA policies → FA criteria → Nominations for FAs → Featured articles → Reconfirmation of featured articles