|
|
| (129 intermediate revisions by 35 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{Navigation (header)}} | | {{Navigation (header)}} |
| | |
| | '''''Please note that the Good Article procedure is ''no longer in use''. Please see [[UDWiki:Featured Articles]].''''' |
| | |
| | |
| {|style="background: #E6F2FF;border:solid 1px #A3B1BF;padding:10px;width:100%" | | {|style="background: #E6F2FF;border:solid 1px #A3B1BF;padding:10px;width:100%" |
| |- | | |- |
| Line 30: |
Line 34: |
| #'''Yes''' - Much better than all the other candidates. --[[Example page|BetterMuch Ralph]] 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) | | #'''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) |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| Line 35: |
Line 42: |
|
| |
|
| ==New Nominations== | | ==New Nominations== |
| ===[[TUMBLEWEED-aikido-river'n-stuff Tactics]]=== | | ===[[Amusing Locations in Malton]]=== |
| This shit be epic, faggots.
| | Seriously. |
| | |
| ====Yes==== | | ====Yes==== |
| #-- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/l}} 13:57, 6 September 2010 (BST)
| | *'''Yes''' - Cause in retrospect the images alone deserve showcasing. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig}} 08:09, 19 March 2012 (UTC) |
| | *'''Humourous Suggestion''' - This shouldn't be on the main space. Oh wait, this isn't the suggestions page. :P --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 12:57, 19 March 2012 (UTC) |
| | *Seriously one of the best articles on the wiki. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>01:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC)</sub> |
| | *'''Yes''' - Excellent article. --[[User:The Hierophant|Papa Moloch]] 05:08, 20 March 2012 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| ====No==== | | ====No==== |
| # '''No''' - But there really should be more nominations. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 19:21, 6 September 2010 (BST)
| | *clearly there are no standards for this anymore apparently. Nothing has changed since it failed it's last votwe and it's never been what could be considered a quality contribution to the wiki or an example of exemplary content. It's a bunch of snickering at unfortionate naming conventions for locations. Hell, a large part of why it exists is to explicitly violate three of the four criteria listed here. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 05:58, 20 March 2012 (UTC) |
| # '''No''' - The main problem with this article is that it is hard to tell if it is a guide/strategy or a parody of a guide. If it was purely a guide with better formatting and information, it would be pure awesomeness. If it was entirely a parody, it would be liquid sex. Unfortunately, it tries to be both and fails at becoming either. - [[User:MHSstaff|MHSstaff]] 20:17, 6 September 2010 (BST)
| | *:Of course there are no standards for this anymore, no one is making any decent articles and we still need articles to cycle onto featured articles. I say we do our best to promote rewards for decent articles. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig}} 10:56, 10 April 2012 (BST) |
|
| |
|
| ==Recent Nominations== | | ==Recent Nominations== |
| ''Older nominations can be found in the [[UDWiki:Featured Articles/Good Articles/Archive|archive]].'' | | ''Older nominations can be found in the [[UDWiki:Featured Articles/Good Articles/Archive|archive]].'' |
|
| |
| ===[[Malton Incident]]===
| |
| It may be fanmade, but it provides some good backstory to how the zombie incident in Malton started. --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 02:12, 24 July 2010 (BST)
| |
| ====Yes====
| |
| #'''Yes''' - I'm offended that you think being fanmade is a bad thing. This thing is a vital piece of our history. Without it, we'd have no way of knowing how this all started. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 02:54, 24 July 2010 (BST)
| |
| ====No====
| |
| #This is a no with a but - it's a good page, but it just look amateurish. I might give it an overhaul soon to have things like paragraphs, headers, more interwiki links, etc, though I don't know how that would affect this vote. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 02:56, 24 July 2010 (BST)
| |
| #Very similar to [[Possible Causes for the Situation]], they are the two pages on the wiki that ''should'' be considered the best in the entire place, but just fall a bit short. Both of these pages added to my fascination with the rich history of Malton when I started many years ago but they need some basic formatting before being accepted IMO. It's not cause I don't think they shouldn't be GA's at this point, it's that with a simple 20 minutes of work, they won't only qualify but will also be miles ahead of what they are now. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 03:07, 24 July 2010 (BST)
| |
|
| |
| '''Failed''' -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/l}} 13:57, 6 September 2010 (BST)
| |
|
| |
| ===[[Spawning]]===
| |
| Just finished writing it. Feedback please, want to make sure its correct. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 20:02, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ====Yes====
| |
| #'''Yes''' - I think it's a well made article.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature}} 21:24, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #:So do I,... I'll change my vote to yes sometime before his seven days are up. Just curious to have an answer to the questions presented. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 21:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' - I think every article is a good one. --{{User:Moctezuma/sig}} 22:08, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' - Very thorough. --[[User:TripleU|TripleU]] 23:52, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Weak Yes''' - It really meets all criteria and pretty interesting. But the accuracy of the article is under the question. it'd be cool to gather statistics on a distance somehow, but it's kind of abuse to the system. --[[User:Fe328|fe328]] 23:59, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' - Maybe not an article that I will read often, but then again that has no bearing on its quality. --{{User:Maverick Farrant/sig}} 09:49, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' A well written article. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 13:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''yep''' liked it.. easy to follow.----[[User:Sexualharrison|sexualharrison]][[Image:Starofdavid2.png | 18px]] ¯\([[Image:Boobs.gif|18px]])/¯ 16:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #Rubber stamp it.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]]<sup>[[User:Kevan|'the true enemy']]</sup> 23:38, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' - Very easy to follow. And I can't think of anything that is missing. {{User:UnholyReign/Sig}} 09:57, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' - well rounded, good stuff. -[[User:Jack Kolt|Jack Kolt]] 14:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' - A surprisingly good article indeed. --[[User:Karloth_vois|Karloth Vois]] <sup>[[¯\(°_o)/¯]]</sup> 18:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' - A lot of effort was put into this as well as many charecter names.--{{User:Michaleson/sig}} 00:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ====No====
| |
| <s>'''Against'''</s> I think that the article needs to address the issue of 'what happens if the building requirments aren't met?' For example: under the [[Spawning#NecroTech Lab Assistant|Lab Assistant]] section,... what happens if there are no NT buildings that fit the crieria? Granted, this may never be the case,... in fact, I doubt that this would ever be the case,... but what if? Is there a really good answer for this? BTW, my vote can easily be swayed to a yes vote,... it's just that this is something I notice, and was hoping it could be addressed in some way... -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 20:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :Hmm. Probably something I can't do with spadework, unless I spend a day creating Necrotech assistant Alts and then throwing barricades at the relevant NT's. Probably a question for Kevan. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 20:16, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ::Maybe not now anymore, but that could have been the case during the March of the Dead. No Necrotechs meeting requirements I mean.--[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 20:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :::I see, so this issue would have to be addressed through a case study,... Perhaps such a thing should be noted in the article somewhere? Personally, I've got a similar, also interesting take on this subject. Considering the priority of NT buildings within the game, and the community as a whole, and inversly, being the big target they are for zombie groups,... how often do you think conditions like this exist? And is it VSB or lower? At that, when it comes to spawning, is this really a luck of the draw sort of thing, or is it something thats vastly affected by the actions of the people playing the game? I think that that's worth noting in the article to, simply because that last point I made is the whole allure of the game to a great many people... everything is situational, and all outcomes are affected solely by the individuals playing... and thus, so are the spawning locations in a way. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 21:04, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ::::[[User:Kevan|Our Lord and Saviour has answered on his talk page]]. I'll add to the page, today. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 09:00, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :::::Vote struck, and changed to yes. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 13:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| <s>Questionable accuracy and the minor need to test what happens if there are no valid spawnpoints.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]]<sup>[[User:Kevan|'the true enemy']]</sup> 03:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC)</s>
| |
| :No valid spawnpoints query answered. Now explain how I can improve on the so called ''questionable'' accuracy? --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 11:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| ::I was just rather dubious that there would be a complex method of spawning when you could have someone just spawn anywhere but...well...eh. Kevan replied and didn't try to knock you down so I'll change my vote.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]]<sup>[[User:Kevan|'the true enemy']]</sup> 23:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #Poodle and SS's reasons are so utterly stupid; if they think the reason for a glossary/player-resource article like this is to just prove what would happen in extreme hypothetical situations, then they are wrong. Having said that, this article is useful to show interested users the nature of spawning; and that is all. GA's in general should have the ability to interest any user into reading at leased a bit of it, but I don't think this has it. Narrow/special interest works don't generally fit my idea of a GA. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 05:26, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #:I just felt the article needed to be 'complete'. It's 'complete', so that's why the Keep. I don't see a GA needing to personally interest anyone, as long as it's a Good Article (NPOV, Compelte, Well Written, "Awesome"), it suffices.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]]<sup>[[User:Kevan|'the true enemy']]</sup> 23:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #::By personally interest people, I mean it needs something in it that does inherently make it "awesome". This is boring. It covers a concept that is experienced within the first two clicks of making an UD account for ''everyone'', I think this sort of coverage isn't ''unnecessary'', but not groundbreaking enough to be a GA at all. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 23:52, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #:::I think its range is more than that. It adds another reason for cading TRP's to only VSB and shows another benefit of emitting a [[feeding groan]] (which needs a major rewrite). I also think that its important to note that some suburbs underpopulation might be due to their lack of Firestations and Necrotechs. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 09:44, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #::::Also why there might be a lower zed presence within the same suburbs,.... -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 13:23, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| This be '''Successful'''. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 04:15, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ===[[Guides:A Beginners Guide to Urban Dead|A Beginners Guide to Urban Dead]]===
| |
| This article has been accessed over 80,000 times,.... has been cited by many other users as still being an important peice of information (as can be seen [[Heytown/News Archive#June 20th|here]], [[Guides:First Day in Malton#For more information|here]], [[User:Darculianar#UsefullPages|here]], and [[Malton_College_of_Medicine/library#Textbooks|here]]), as well as having been cited for information (like [[Suggestion talk:20070928 More Knives|here]] for example). That said, many users, and pages not listed above, link to it, having thought it was important to keep. Also, when it was reveiwed [[Guides/Review/Archive#Guides:A Beginners Guide to Urban Dead|here]], it seemed to have some support as long as it was updated. These are the reasons why I think the article should be a Featured Article. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 04:24, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ====Yes====
| |
| #'''Yes''' As Above. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 04:24, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' - Nice article - easy to read, good information. --[[User:Fe328|fe328]] 11:56, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' It provides an excellent and highly detailed guide; I wish I knew half this stuff when I was starting out! --[[User:Oldharry101|Oldharry101]] <sup>[[Project Welcome|W!]]</sup> 18:50, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' A little lacking regarding zombies, and understates the importance of malls, but has all the info a fresh slab of meat would need. --[[User:TripleU|TripleU]] 21:55, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' OOOhhh.. Ids ddis de beoqqqwww. BEOWWW!!! Get Fit mutha fucka get fit!!! Heeaaywhooo. HOOOO! ShiaaAAAA. i'M About to take a shia lebouf on ya HOOOO!!! HOOO!!!!!!--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 01:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #:I don't know what you just said other than yes.... -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 04:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' - although it could do with being split up into subpages. {{User:Linkthewindow/Sig}} 08:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' Its not really a guide, just a lot of important glossary pages all stuck together in one place. Still an excellent resource mind. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 09:38, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''Yes''' - Helped some of my friends get into the game, wored for them will work for anybody. --{{User:Michaleson/sig}} 00:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ====No====
| |
| #POV much? Lacking basic information and vague when it comes to its own declarations. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 12:07, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #:Vague in it's declarations, and non neutral POV.... hmmm....? -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 13:21, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #'''No''' - I don't really like the layout of it. Perhaps some tables for some of the information, or just links to separate pages with the information (for example Building types). I'm not really a big fan of a huge amount of information on the one page. Don't see why the information on building types needs to be repeated on this page as well, especially ''useless'' information like interior and exterior descriptions. It just builds up the page more. {{User:UnholyReign/Sig}} 06:25, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #:Really,.... you'd rather have it look like '''[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Guides:A_Beginners_Guide_to_Urban_Dead&oldid=1215404 this?]''' -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 13:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #::No I wouldn't like it like that. '''You know what I meant''' Don't be a smart-arse. '''But''' just in case I didn't make it clear the first time... '''The beginners guide should give relevant information that beginners need. Just the basics, some details where needed. But NOT a complete guide on the entire game.''' The details are included on other pages, and people can access them by searching if need be. Rather then clotting up a beginners guide with ''useless'' information. On top of that, some basic information that beginners '''would''' need isn't included as well. Thats why I don't like it. {{User:UnholyReign/Sig}} 11:40, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| #:::I do know what you mean,... however,.... I know being new to a game, I like to waltz in with everything on the table, and a good working knowledge of what I should be doing, or what the working aspects of a game are. Not just having my character spawn someplace... and not know what I should be looking at, or how to get into a building.... or why I should even give a rats ass about libraries,... which you seem to think are absolutly frivolous, amongst other things I've included. Obviously this isn't the case, both from an RP perspective, as well as a strategic perspective, both of which are touched on within the article. -{{User:Poodle_of_doom/signiture}} 22:28, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| I'm gonna cycle this as '''Successful''' too. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 04:15, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
|
| [[Category:Good Article Nominees]] | | [[Category:Good Article Nominees]] |
01:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC)