UDWiki:Featured Articles/Candidates: Difference between revisions

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(better, maybe it still needs some work)
Line 2: Line 2:
{|style="background: #E6F2FF;border:solid 1px #A3B1BF;padding:10px;width:100%"
{|style="background: #E6F2FF;border:solid 1px #A3B1BF;padding:10px;width:100%"
|-
|-
|{{Shortcut|[[FA/V]]}}<span style="font-size:16pt">Feature Article Voting</span><br>Here, we determine which articles are to be [[UDWiki:Featured Articles|featured articles]] (FAs). Any page in the main namespace can be a featured article, (including group pages and user pages if it is deemed that they meet the criteria below) as long as they have been deemed a "Good" Article. Nominations for Good articles takes place [[UDWiki:Featured Articles/Good Articles|here]].  
|{{Shortcut|[[FA/V]]}}<span style="font-size:16pt">Feature Article Voting</span><br>Voting for [[UDWiki:Featured Articles|featured article]] (FA) status takes place here. Any page is eligible to be voted on, including group pages and user pages; the only requisite is that the page satisfies the criteria, or the community finds it "worthy enough" to be featured.


Articles which have been given FA status, or have been featured in the past should have [[Template:FA|the FA star]] placed on the page. Sysops need to remember to semi-protect or fully-protect the current featured article from vandalism if deemed necessary.  
Articles that have featured article status should have [[Template:FA|the FA star]] placed on the page.


Voting lasts for a week, with the article with the most votes becoming the Featured Article. Only one vote per user. In the case of a tie, one article will be picked to be the current FA, with the other (tied) articles to be shown on subsequent weeks. Articles may only be featured once, unless no other candidates are chosen. In that case, the current FA will stay until a new one is voted in.
<big>'''Criteria'''</big>
*'''NPOV''' - The article must be from a [[UDWiki:NPOV|neutral point of view]] and not show significant bias. Possible exceptions may be made, depending on the article and community opinion.  
*'''Complete''' - No major facts or details are neglected; it is finished as can be.
*'''Well Written''' - The article uses proper English, such as correct grammar and spelling, and it is written in a clear and readable style.
*'''Generally Awesome''' - This is a joke criteria, hence it is very serious.


''These are guidelines only and candidates do not need to follow it to the letter.''
|}
|}
{| align="right"
{| align="right"
Line 13: Line 18:
|__TOC__
|__TOC__
|}
|}
==Example==
===[[Example page|Featured Article candidate]]===
Featured Article candidate has recently undergone a lot of improvement from various editors. It's NPOV, it's concise and informative. I also believe it to be generally awesome, just take a look at the talk page discussion, people love it! --[[Example page|FA Suggestur]] 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)
====Yes====
#'''Yes''' - I see only a few minor issues, but those seem to be fixed readily. Otherwise it's good. --[[Example page|OptimistBob]] 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)
# Love it! --[[Example page|Few Words Joe]] 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)
#'''Yes''' - Maintains good article balance, strong intro, accurate information, good grammar and spelling. Well wikified. --[[Example page|Overly Technical Jim]] 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)
#'''Yes''' - Much better than all the other candidates. --[[Example page|BetterMuch Ralph]] 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)
#'''Yes''' - I like this part [[Example page|here]]. --[[Example page|Specific Jen]] 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)
====No====
#'''No''' - I don't like it. --[[Example page|Unspecific Sam]] 07:00, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
#'''No''' - This issue [[Example page|here]] needs to be addressed. --[[Example page|Issue Lue]] 07:00, 8 December 2010 (UTC)


==Current Candidates==
==Current Candidates==
<!--
<!--
Place candidates under here from the "Next Pool" section every week, and change the timestamp to reflect when the current page was put up for voting
Place candidates for Featured Articles here.
-->
-->
 
''None right now.''
[[Battle of Blackmore]]
 
'''Up For Voting As Of:''' 22:27, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 
==Next Pool==
''Place future candidates under this section while voting is in progress.''
 
*[[River Tactics]]
*[[Guides:First Day in Malton]]
*[[The Fall of Monroeville Mall]]
*[[Rat Tactics]]
*[[User:Grim s/Grims guide to staying alive]]
*[[First Siege of Caiger Mall]]
*[[NecroWatch]]
*[[Zombie]]

Revision as of 23:09, 28 July 2012

Feature Article Voting
Voting for featured article (FA) status takes place here. Any page is eligible to be voted on, including group pages and user pages; the only requisite is that the page satisfies the criteria, or the community finds it "worthy enough" to be featured.

Articles that have featured article status should have the FA star placed on the page.

Criteria

  • NPOV - The article must be from a neutral point of view and not show significant bias. Possible exceptions may be made, depending on the article and community opinion.
  • Complete - No major facts or details are neglected; it is finished as can be.
  • Well Written - The article uses proper English, such as correct grammar and spelling, and it is written in a clear and readable style.
  • Generally Awesome - This is a joke criteria, hence it is very serious.

These are guidelines only and candidates do not need to follow it to the letter.

Example

Featured Article candidate

Featured Article candidate has recently undergone a lot of improvement from various editors. It's NPOV, it's concise and informative. I also believe it to be generally awesome, just take a look at the talk page discussion, people love it! --FA Suggestur 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)

Yes

  1. Yes - I see only a few minor issues, but those seem to be fixed readily. Otherwise it's good. --OptimistBob 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)
  2. Love it! --Few Words Joe 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)
  3. Yes - Maintains good article balance, strong intro, accurate information, good grammar and spelling. Well wikified. --Overly Technical Jim 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)
  4. Yes - Much better than all the other candidates. --BetterMuch Ralph 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)
  5. Yes - I like this part here. --Specific Jen 20:29, 3 April 2009 (BST)

No

  1. No - I don't like it. --Unspecific Sam 07:00, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
  2. No - This issue here needs to be addressed. --Issue Lue 07:00, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Current Candidates

None right now.

Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=UDWiki:Featured_Articles/Candidates&oldid=2015228"