Difference between revisions of "Wikisimpsons:Featured article"

Revision as of 16:07, June 18, 2010

Past Nominations: 1

Contents 1 Featured article nominations 2 June 2010 3 Barney Gumble 3.1 Support (9) 3.2 Neutral (0) 3.3 Oppose (0) 3.4 Comments 4 Reverend Timothy Lovejoy 4.1 Support (3) 4.2 Neutral (2) 4.3 Oppose (0) 4.4 Comments 5 Charles Montgomery Burns 5.1 Support (4) 5.2 Neutral (0) 5.3 Oppose (1) 5.4 Comments 6 Ralph Wiggum 6.1 Support (7) 6.2 Oppose (0) 6.3 Neutral (0) 6.4 Comments 7 Springfield 7.1 Support (4) 7.2 Neutral (0) 7.3 Oppose (0) 7.4 Comments 8 Lenny Leonard 8.1 Support (2) 8.2 Neutral(0) 8.3 Oppose(0) 8.4 Comments 9 Mrs. Glick 9.1 Support (0) 9.2 Neutral (0) 9.3 Oppose (3) 9.4 Comments

The featured articles of the wiki are articles that represent the best Wikisimpsons has to offer.

So just what makes a featured article? Well, we've prepared a list just in case someone should ask that, and it is as follows.

An article must...

1. ...be well written and detailed
2. ...be unbiased, from a neutral point of view
3. ...be sourced with all available sources and appearances
4. ...follow the Manual of Style
5. ...not be the object of any ongoing edit wars
6. ...not be tagged with any sort of improvement tags (i.e. more sources, expand, etc)
7. ...have a succinct proper lead that can be used for the front page featured box
8. ...have a reasonable amount of red links; use common sense
9. ...have a complete, detailed biography if it's a character article
10. ...follow the rules in Project Characters if it is a character article.

For more information on what makes a featured article, see Wikipedia:What is a featured article.

How to nominate:

1. First, nominate an article you find is worthy of featured 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. The article is placed on the featured article list and added to the front page queue.
5. Also, if, at least a week after the article's nomination, that article has 5 supports and no objections, it will be added to the queue, and will be officially known as a "featured 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 added to the queue and be officially known as a "featured article".
5. A user can only nominate one article a month.
6. All nominations must be put at the bottom of the page.

Also remember to add {{nominated}} at the top of the article you are nominating.

Featured article nominations

June 2010

Barney Gumble

It has never been featured and should. ThePlatypus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.42.65.64 (talk) 14:25, April 4, 2010

Support (9)

1. Good. detailed article. ☆The Solar Dragon ^(Talk)☆ 13:28, April 4, 2010 (UTC)
2. Yes, okily-dokily. Dohayecarumbadoh 20:31, April 5, 2010 (UTC)
3. Yep - - Smiley12 was here at 21:33, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
4. I agree with Solar; it's a good, detailed article, and gives a great idea about him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.25.40.124 (talk) 19:41, May 5, 2010
5. Yup :) UFO Editor 18:51, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
6. Great Article, could use more interesting trivia though. Alexandersig 20:55, May 14, 2010 (UTC)
7. Yes from me. Josegiraffio 14:08, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
8. This should be a featured article. — ^TheHomer ^{(Talk • Contributions)} 20:38, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
9. Looks great. (BUUURRRRRRPPP!!) -- Mythigator 12:34, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral (0)

#Although very detailed and has a great long list of appearances, I think this list still needs work. Every episode should have a bullet point * and there should be no spaces in the template itself, e.g. some are like {{ep| Episode Name }} Once this is cleaned up though, I will happily move back to support. ☆The Solar Dragon ^(Talk)☆ 21:00, April 5, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose (0)

Comments

• Yes, I may seem picky picking at the smallest things wrong with the article but it is all continuity. We need it to all flow and look the same, as with all websites. ☆The Solar Dragon ^(Talk)☆ 21:08, April 5, 2010 (UTC)
  • Took me a while but have updated all appearances. ☆The Solar Dragon ^(Talk)☆ 15:01, April 6, 2010 (UTC)

Reverend Timothy Lovejoy

A great article for a random character. ThePlatypus 12:31, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

Support (3)

1. All looks fine now. Would be good. ☆The Solar Dragon ^(Talk)☆ 11:10, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
2. Now In-Universe and pretty long for a random character. Josegiraffio 14:09, June 3, 2010 (UTC)
3. Yeah. Good article.    Effluvium    talk    contributions    email   17:49, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral (2)

#It is good except the appearances list needs updating as they don't all have the episode template and there are some red links. ☆The Solar Dragon ^(Talk)☆ 13:25, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

1. Yep, Solar Dragon is right. Some appearances need to be cleaned up to fit with the Manual of Style. Dohayecarumbadoh 23:48, May 13, 2010 (UTC)
2. It needs to be fit in with the manual of style first, it's not in-universe style. Ldude893 00:10, May 14, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose (0)

#Only just realised it is not in in-universe style as well. Needs the appearances and to be in in-universe style. ☆The Solar Dragon ^(Talk)☆ 07:02, May 14, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

Charles Montgomery Burns

A good detailed article, which has obviously had a lot of work put into it. Personally, I think it is one of the best on the wiki!    Effluvium    talk    contributions    email   15:46, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

Support (4)

1. Looks great. I just cleaned it up and it now is fine. The Solar Dragon 16:04, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
2. I vote for it. — ^TheHomer 17:42, June 1, 2010 (UTC)
3. I like what I see. - ThePlatypus 18:06, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
4. Yeah. Seems OK. UFO Editor 18:44, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral (0)

Oppose (1)

• Not clean enough. Didn't I clean this article already? There's too much of the article written in out-of-universe context.Ldude893 06:04, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

The only part of the article which isn't in-universe is the "Character" section, where it explains how the character was created and designed. That doesn't need to be in-universe style. If anybody can inform me of any other sections which aren't in-universe, I'd be grateful as I can go and fix it. Thanks!    Effluvium    talk    contributions    email   20:05, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Ralph Wiggum

Very detailed, and if his "home daddy" can make it to the featured article spot, so can he! :) Dohayecarumbadoh 01:29, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Support (7)

1. Seems like a great article and could easily be featured. The Solar Dragon 06:43, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
2. Long, detailed article that is in-universe style. Josegiraffio 09:25, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
3. It's got my support.    Effluvium    talk    contributions    email   11:21, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
4. My suport too. — ^TheHomer 14:03, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
5. Agreed.Pokeman223 15:16, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
6. Sure. - ThePlatypus 18:01, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
7. Good article UFO Editor 18:44, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose (0)

Neutral (0)

Comments

Springfield

I can't believe this has never been a featured article!!!! It is definitely one of the best articles in the wiki!! It contains everything you need to know about Springfield, how it was founded, culture, economy, climate, transportation, districts and much more! It really should be a featured article ;) Gonhegon 15:20, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Support (4)

1. Seems fine and it is all in-universe. The Solar Dragon 15:30, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
2. Very long and comprehensive. - ThePlatypus 18:03, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
3. Seems OK.    Effluvium    talk    contributions    email   17:49, June 11, 2010 (UTC)
4. Yep --Smiley12 was here at 05:44, June 14, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral (0)

Oppose (0)

Comments

• Also, different to the usual character articles nominated so it is a strong support for me. The Solar Dragon 06:02, June 14, 2010 (UTC)

Lenny Leonard

I read the article and I thought it should be featured Pokeman223

Support (2)

1. OK. Looks good. The Solar Dragon 15:48, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
2. Seems alright.    Effluvium    talk    contributions    email   21:06, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral(0)

Oppose(0)

Comments

• Rest of the article seems fine but the appearences section is incomplete. Josegiraffio 19:21, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Mrs. Glick

This article has everything in order. It actually is a long article for someone like Mrs. Glick seeing there is barely anything to write about her. Just made it in-Universe. - ThePlatypus 11:49, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

Support (0)

Neutral (0)

Oppose (3)

1. Seems too short to be a featured article. The Solar Dragon 11:52, June 18, 2010 (UTC)
2. Yes, way too short, and it's not exactly informative. Ldude893 12:39, June 18, 2010 (UTC)
3. I agree that it is a long article for such a minor character, but I don't feel it should be featured.    Effluvium    talk    contributions    email   17:46, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

• I personally don't think it matters if it is long as long as it is a good article. This article is a good article, and I'd like to see people who oppose to it write one longer. - ThePlatypus 20:41, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

I know it is good for a minor character like that but look at the length on the Featured article section of the main page. It is about the same length of the whole article so sorry, but it won't be featured. The Solar Dragon 21:02, June 18, 2010 (UTC)