|
|
Archives: 2 1
|
|
|
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…
- …be well-written.
- …list all canon and non-canon appearances.
- …follow the Manual of Style and all other policies on Wikisimpsons.
- …not be tagged with any improvement tags (i.e. image needed, stub, etc).
- …have all canon (or non-canon if this is all there is) information presented.
- …be completely referenced.
- …have all image licenses fully filled-out.
- …provide at least one relevant quote on the article if available.
- …include a "Behind the Laughter" section for real world information (if any).
Nominating process
How to nominate:
- First, nominate an article you find is worthy of comprehensive status, putting it at the bottom of the list below; see criteria above.
- 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).
- Supporters adjust the article until the objectors (with reasonable objections) are satisfied.
- 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:
- Before doing anything, be sure to read the article completely, keeping a sharp eye out for mistakes.
- Afterwards, compare the article to the criteria listed above, and then either support or object the article's nomination.
- If you object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved.
- 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.
- 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.
- All nominations must be put at the bottom of the page.
Note: Remember to sign your posts (~~~~).
Nominations
I added info about roughly all the time he appeared, it has some trivia, I think it could be comprehensive. |       | Talk | Contributions | Edit count | 03:13, 20 March 2012 (EDT)
Support (1)
- Looks fine to me. The Solar Dragon (Talk - Contribs.) 09:10, 1 May 2012 (EDT)
Because he's Ukrainian. The article looks pretty much up to shape. --Nick97 (talk ~ contribs) 18:11, 23 May 2012 (EDT)
Neutral (0)
Oppose (0)
#Without voice actor information, it can not be comprehensive. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 03:24, 20 March 2012 (EDT)
- I went for Ping Marshall, as he's one time and we don't have him for any other character. | | Talk | Contributions | Edit count | 03:46, 20 March 2012 (EDT)
- Isn't he supposed to be a reference or parody to some character from the show 24? I beleive the character was also named Victor, and had his wife killed and then was killed by Keifer Sutherland's character in that show. Or something like that. --Nick97 (talk ~ contribs) 18:17, 23 May 2012 (EDT)
- He is - I put it on the references, must have forgot about the article.--Cook879 11:25, 24 May 2012 (EDT)
A great article with multiple images and definitely deserves to be comprehensive. Contains an abundance of information. Josegiraffio 18:22, 31 March 2012 (EDT)
Support (1)
- Great article. The Solar Dragon (Talk - Contribs.) 09:10, 1 May 2012 (EDT)
Neutral (0)
Oppose (0)
Full to the brim with info. ~ Phinbart (talk • contribs) 16:34, 7 April 2012 (EDT)
Support (5)
- Well, I had to change "and" to an ampersand (&), because that is how the show's title is written like. It is an okay article. --Fred (Talk • Contribs. • Editcount) 23:13, 11 April 2012 (EDT)
- Three people had to do major stuff to this article; I had to put the history in past tense. Anyway, it's seems okay now so I think it could become comprehensive. | | Talk | Contributions | Edit count | 12:36, 23 May 2012 (EDT)
- Support the nomination now. The article looks a lot better after all the work that everyone put into it. -- Mythigator 09:42, 31 May 2012 (EDT)
- Definitly deserves it now. --Nick97 (talk ~ contribs) 10:16, 31 May 2012 (EDT)
- Make it six supports. WebkinzMania 14:51, 31 May 2012 (EDT)
#Made the changes from cell to cel and now it's looking good. The Solar Dragon (Talk - Contribs.) 09:10, 1 May 2012 (EDT)
Neutral (0)
#Good article, but the term is cel (only ONE "L") when it's used in reference to animated cartoons. -- Mythigator 15:17, 12 April 2012 (EDT) (Withdrawn after Solar fixed the spelling. -- Mythigator 09:42, 31 May 2012 (EDT))
Oppose (1)
- I've changed my mind with this. It shouldn't be a comprehensive article, it should be nominated for featured. ☆The Solar Dragon (Talk - Contribs.)☆ 15:30, 31 May 2012 (EDT)
For a page that was started over one hour ago, it has 3,418 bytes and a lot of references and is very informative. I listed former Yankee players that were on the Simpsons (or mentioned). WebkinzMania 08:40, 21 April 2012 (EDT)
Support (1)
- Great looking article. Well done on putting it together. The Solar Dragon (Talk - Contribs.) 09:10, 1 May 2012 (EDT)
Neutral (0)
Oppose (0)
Definitely complete article, well written. All info there. The Solar Dragon (Talk - Contribs.) 13:58, 1 May 2012 (EDT)
Support (1)
- We are very lucky we had an episode focused on her. The article improved so much. WebkinzMania 14:39, 1 May 2012 (EDT)
Neutral (0)
Oppose (0)
Great looking article, very long and complete. Solar Dragon (Talk • Contribs.) 10:59, 15 May 2012 (EDT)
Support (0)
Neutral (0)
Oppose (0)
|
