UDWiki:Featured Articles/Candidates
| Featured Article Candidates Evaluation for featured article (FA) status takes place here. Any page is eligible to be submitted for evaluation, including group pages and user pages. The only requisite is that the page follows the criteria; it doesn't need to be satisfied absolutely. Ultimately the page should be something the community wants to be placed on the main page, where it's highly visible and assumed to be exemplary; it should fulfill some notion of special. In determining whether or not a page becomes featured, the candidate will be discussed and if there are no major concerns raised at the end of 7 days, the page will achieve featured status. During the 7 days any major concerns can be addressed, either by refuting them or improving the page to fix the problem. If discussion on the candidate goes further than 7 days, participants may continue discussing or altering the page without the submission being automatically closed. Please note this is not a vote. When making a supporting or opposing claim, back up the claim with reasons or evidence. However, there should be at least three users commenting on a submission for the submission process to be considered valid. This is to avoid a page slipping through unnoticed. Be aware that the criteria for different types of candidates—articles, groups, and user pages—changes to reflect different requirements; it does not make sense, for example, to have "neutrality" as a criteria for user pages. Remember these are guidelines only and candidates do not need to follow the criteria to the letter. Articles that achieve featured article status should have the FA star ( If at sometime, after a page has achieved featured status, substantial changes are made that seem to degenerate the page past the level at which it was submitted, then the page can be resubmitted here and be re-evaluated. The same criteria and process follows; if a major concern is raised that cannot be addressed, then the page loses its featured status. |
Format
- Submit candidates under the appropriate header (Articles, Group pages, User Pages), beneath its respective Candidates header.
- Make a level four header with the linked name of the page you are submitting.
- Make a level five header labelled Comments and put in brackets the name of the page your submitting (so that someone can jump to individual comment sections which otherwise would be identical and dysfunctional). The comment section is a free-for-all discussion, so there's no need for supporting or opposing headers, numbering or bullet-pointing, nor bolding anything.
Example
- Substitute the text in RED CAPITALS with the details of your submission.
==Articles== ===Article Criteria=== [...] ===Article Candidates=== ====[[EXAMPLE ARTICLE FA CANDIDATE]]==== TEXT EXPLAINING WHY YOU THINK THE PAGE SHOULD BE FEATURED. ~~~~ =====Comments (EXAMPLE ARTICLE FA CANDIDATE)===== COMMENTS SUPPORTING OR OPPOSING SUBMISSIONS, WITH REASONS. ----
Articles
These include glossary pages, event pages including historical events, locations, guides and tactics.
Article Criteria
- NPOV - The article must be from a neutral point of view; articles should avoid taking sides (such as emphasizing zombies over humans, or a particular group or opinion). Exceptions may be made, depending on the article and community decision.
- Complete - No major facts or details are neglected; it is finished as can be.
- Well Written - The writing is grammatically correct and clear; it communicates what it's trying to say.
- Generally Awesome - This is a joke criteria, hence it is very serious.
Article Candidates
Submit candidates here.
Group Pages
Any group page or group subpage, whether active, inactive, or historical, can be submitted.
Group Page Criteria
- NPOV - There should be an NPOV lead or introduction, which explains who the group is (e.g. group type, structure, size, creation). Since it's expected that the article is created from the group's perspective, the rest of the page need not be neutral. The NPOV lead only applies to the main group page.
- Presentation - An interesting and original page design, brought about by the code and any images, is a possible way to satisfy this criterion. Writing style and content can also satisfy the criteria.
- Well Written - The writing is grammatically correct and clear; it communicates what it's trying to say.
- Generally Awesome - This is a joke criteria, hence it is very serious.
Group Page Candidates
Submit candidates here.
User Pages
Any user page or content can be submitted. For example, journals, works of fiction or stories related to zombies or Urban Dead. Note that user pages being submitted should have their own, dedicated page (a subpage).
User Page Criteria
- Presentation - An interesting and original page design, brought about by the code and any images, is a possible way to satisfy this criterion. Writing style and content can also satisfy the criteria. User pages that have content consistent with guides or wiki rantings still need to be accurate and complete, similar to the Article Criteria.
- Well Written - The writing is grammatically correct and clear; it communicates what it's trying to say.
- Generally Awesome - This is a joke criteria, hence it is very serious.
User Page Candidates
Submit candidates here.
User:Rosslessness/Random_Rambling/Sandbox404
Don't know why I suddenly thought of this one. What can I say, there have been literally hundreds of survivor groups trying to reclaim places, but I've never seen one written up since Candyland. There's an interesting tactic buried in here, and it also contains some praise for the DEM. A better title would be nice. I think it's awesome, I think it's NPOV, (because it treats zombies as players and not "baddies") and MHS wrote the intro, so thats well written at least. --Ross Less Ness Enter Stranger... 22:34, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
User:Rosslessness/Random_Rambling/Sandbox404
COMMENTS SUPPORTING OR OPPOSING SUBMISSIONS, WITH REASONS.
For ross has a nice way with words and the article is informative (plus it seems survivors could use some help with thinking). --
Org XIII Alts 22:50, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Doesn't really do it for me. Dunno why, I think the formatting is a bit of a mess. A ZOMBIE ANT 00:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
- Probably is. You people and your differing resolutions
--Ross Less Ness Enter Stranger... 00:57, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
- I wouldn't be too quick to blame resolution, even though that would help a bit. I don't enjoy going down and having to navigate through the various centered and right-aligned templates of varying sizes and shapes. A bit offputting. A ZOMBIE ANT 01:27, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
- Hmm. Anyone have formatting suggestions? --Ross Less Ness Enter Stranger... 16:22, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
- I wouldn't be too quick to blame resolution, even though that would help a bit. I don't enjoy going down and having to navigate through the various centered and right-aligned templates of varying sizes and shapes. A bit offputting. A ZOMBIE ANT 01:27, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
I think you dropped an "and" when you copied the intro from my space. You also seem to have couple of mistakes as well. For example, every quote from the article is from April but the mass CR attack is from June? Is that right? -MHSstaff 18:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll revisit that. --Ross Less Ness Enter Stranger... 18:12, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
I like this article a lot. There are small minor grammar things like: spell out numbers under ten, especially when you are starting a sentence with a number, minor comma things, etc. I tried to fix some of them here. That said, it reads well, and assuming Rosslessness makes sure the timeline and dates are right, I would support this. -MHSstaff 19:13, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
- Dates and numbers modified. MHS, if you want to sort out the commas, that would be great. I'm away for a few days, but I'll look at the box for the feral mentality thing when I get back. --Ross Less Ness Enter Stranger... 00:13, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Is this still being worked on, and if not, how do I process it? Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 19:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- Needs me to regrammar check, then post it through the MHS double check. DDR wants formatting changes, but hasn't said how. --Ross Less Ness Enter Stranger... 17:47, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
- No edits have been done since the 16th. I'm assuming this one succeeds? Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 17:10, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
- Let me do another rewrite this week. --Ross Less Ness Enter Stranger... 17:11, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
- No edits have been done since the 16th. I'm assuming this one succeeds? Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 17:10, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Reviewing Featured Articles
This section is for current Featured Articles for which serious objections or concerns have been raised, and are thus under review as to whether they should retain their FA status.
Older Submissions
Older submissions can be found in the archive. The archive of Featured Article reviews is located here. For even older submissions, when the good article process was used, see that archive.
