Difference between revisions of "Wikisimpsons:Comprehensive article nominations"

Archives: 1

Contents 1 What is a comprehensive article? 2 Criteria 3 Nominating process 4 Nominations 4.1 Opening Sequence 4.1.1 Support (2) 4.1.2 Neutral (0) 4.1.3 Oppose (0) 4.1.4 Comments 4.2 Gabbo 4.2.1 Support (0) 4.2.2 Neutral (0) 4.2.3 Oppose (0) 4.2.4 Comments 4.3 Lord Montymort 4.3.1 Support (3) 4.3.2 Neutral(0) 4.3.3 Oppose (0) 4.3.4 Comments 4.4 Canyonero 4.4.1 Support (1) 4.4.2 Neutral(0) 4.4.3 Oppose (0) 4.4.4 Comments 4.5 The Re-Deadening 4.5.1 Support (1) 4.5.2 Neutral(0) 4.5.3 Oppose (0) 4.5.4 Comments 4.6 Ian Maxtone-Graham 4.6.1 Support (0) 4.6.2 Neutral (0) 4.6.3 Oppose (2)

This page is to nominate minor articles as being complete, or comprehensive articles.

What is a comprehensive article?

A comprehensive article is one that is complete with all its relevant information, but due to its slight size, cannot obtain Featured article status (our best work). The purpose of this project is to establish uniformity among Wikisimpsons, by seeing that all articles are, essentially, complete, with all their relevant material. Through this process, we mainly hope to let readers know when an article they are reading is complete, and not a "stub" (an article which has been denoted as lacking in information), though its size might suggest so. Episodes and regular and supporting characters cannot qualify as comprehensive articles, as they can obtain featured status. (For nominating these articles, see Wikisimpsons:Featured article.)

Criteria

An article must…

1. …be well-written.
2. …list all canon and non-canon appearances.
3. …follow the Manual of Style and all other policies on Wikisimpsons.
4. …not be tagged with any improvement tags (i.e. image needed, stub, etc).
5. …have all canon (or non-canon if this is all there is) information presented.
6. …be completely referenced.
7. …have all image licenses fully filled-out.
8. …provide at least one relevant quote on the article if available.
9. …include a "Behind the Laughter" section for real world information (if any).

Nominating process

How to nominate:

1. First, nominate an article you find is worthy of comprehensive status, putting it at the bottom of the list below; see criteria above.
2. Others will object to the nomination if they disagree that the article is good enough; they will then supply reasons for doing so, and ways to improve the article (errors, style, organization, images, notability, sources).
3. Supporters adjust the article until the objectors (with reasonable objections) are satisfied.
4. If, at least a week after the article's nomination, that article has 5 supports and no objections, it will be officially known as a "comprehensive article".

How to vote:

1. Before doing anything, be sure to read the article completely, keeping a sharp eye out for mistakes.
2. Afterwards, compare the article to the criteria listed above, and then either support or object the article's nomination.
   1. If you object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved.
3. As stated above, any objections will be looked upon by the nominator, supporters, and anyone willing to improve the article, and action will be taken to please the objectors.
4. Once all objectors' complaints have been solved (or the article has 5 supports and no objections after at least a week), the article will be officially known as a "comprehensive article", and the {{comp}} template can be added to the top of its page.
5. All nominations must be put at the bottom of the page.

Note: Remember to sign your posts (~~~~).

Nominations

Opening Sequence

A massive article, not likely to get featured though, that is full of pictures and information about each of the opening sequences. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 14:14, September 4, 2010 (UTC)

Support (2)

1. Agreed. Has had a lot of work put into it... Effluvium 20:17, September 16, 2010 (UTC)
2. Highly detailed. ----- It's Magic - Kingcjc 20:20, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral (0)

Oppose (0)

Comments

Gabbo

This is a fairly long article for a character who was only the focus of one episode. It has a picture, quote and is of decent length. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 20:13, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Support (0)

Neutral (0)

Oppose (0)

Comments

Lord Montymort

Great article for a character that's only made one non-canon appearance. Unlikely to get featured. Doh5678 14:33 October 16th

Support (3)

1. Looks good. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 12:40, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
2. Good, long article that probably isn't long enough to get featured. Had a lot of effort put into writing it. Josegiraffio ^{Want to talk} 13:36, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
3. Got my vote. -- Mythigator 10:36, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Neutral(0)

Oppose (0)

Comments

Canyonero

A good article for a car and it has complete song lyrics as well. Josegiraffio ^{Want to talk} 10:42, November 14, 2010 (UTC)

Support (1)

1. Just updated it. Now looks good. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 12:43, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Neutral(0)

Oppose (0)

Comments

The Re-Deadening

Long and detailed for a movie article, and has had more editors than just me putting a lot of work into it. I was working on it a little (since the local TV station just re-ran "The Ziff Who Came to Dinner"), and I'm convinced that the article now has everything that we know (or can reasonably conjecture) about the movie. -- Mythigator 10:36, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Support (1)

1. A great article. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 11:35, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Neutral(0)

Oppose (0)

Comments

Ian Maxtone-Graham

One of the longest staff articles I've seen and has no red links at all. Doh5678 18:17, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Support (0)

Neutral (0)

Oppose (2)

1. A lot of content unrelated to the Simpsons and probably copied from Wikipedia. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 18:46, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
2. Also opposed, for the same reasons. This article needs to be rewritten. -- Mythigator 05:28, 28 December 2010 (UTC)