On this page, I want to suggest a new procedure for "featured articles" and related things. I am doing this on a user subpage because the various existing discussion pages regarding this topic are already very cluttered.

Some linksEdit

• Memory Alpha:Featured article policies
• Memory Alpha:Nominations for featured articles
• Template:ArticleOfTheWeek (the "Article Of The Week" (=AOTW) is chosen from all featured articles).

...and their discussion pages.

The problemsEdit

Number of self-nominations 

There's a huge number of self-nominations. Articles that are exclusively or mainly written by one person are nominated by that person (from here).

Number of featured articles in general 

There are discussions about the overall number of featured articles. There shouldn't be too many relative to the number of articles in the database (from here).

Sort of pages being nominated 

Some complain about the types of pages being nominated (episodes, minor characters, ...). Some even reject article nominations based on the type (from here).

Formal criteria missing 

There might be a need for a formal definition of what exactly is necessary to make an article a good article (from here). Related to that, objections should contain valid a reason (from here).

Number of simultaneous nominations by one user 

This number should probably be restricted (from here).

New procedureEdit

What if... we just combine the procedures for FA nomination and AOTW voting? It might sound a little radical first, but what else is an AOTW than an article featured very prominently?

ProcedureEdit

I suggest the following procedure:

1. A new voting page is created, similar to Template talk:ArticleOfTheWeek. On this page, sections for each week of the year are created, each containing a subsection Article suggestions and a subsection Votes.
2. In the Article suggestions subsection of each week, each user may suggest one page.
3. In the Votes subsection of each week, each user may vote for one page (and, of course, may change his vote as often as he likes)
4. At the end of a week, the article with the most votes becomes the new "Article of the Week" and also gets added to a permanent "Hall of Fame". In case of a draw, the article with the highest number of different non-IP contributors is chosen (Alternatively: the oldest article?).
5. If no article gets more than three(?) votes, last weeks article is kept (Alternatively: last weeks second place, if that one got more than three votes).

Necessary cleanupEdit

• All articles that have been AOTW in the past get added to the Hall of Fame.
• Featured article status is kept for the moment, but will be removed in the long run.
• "FA nomination" stops immediately, "FA removal" continues and stops once all FA's are removed.

Additional ideasEdit

• In the Hall of Fame, both the "current version" and the revision at the time of AOTW nomination should be linked.
• A template stating that "this article was the Article of the Week" (+DATE) should be added to the article.
• As always, votes should be restricted to non-IP users with a specified minimal number of contributions.
• An article should not be allowed to be suggested two weeks in a row. That way, we prevent the suggestion of the same articles again and again.

ThoughtsEdit

• This procedure, while radical, would solve most of the problems with the current FA nomination procedure - especially the number of nominated and featured articles, but also the number of simultaneous nominations by one user and even the type of pages being nominated.
• All discussion about the article would stay on the articles' talk page. If you would support an article if something was changed/got added, mention it on the talk page or just change it yourself. That way, the nomination period doubles as a sort of "peer review".