Difference between revisions of "Wikisimpsons talk:Comprehensive article nominations"
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
We also need some determining criteria for a CA. I was thinking each project could have their own (I'd decide on Locations) or, the same criteria for all articles. | We also need some determining criteria for a CA. I was thinking each project could have their own (I'd decide on Locations) or, the same criteria for all articles. | ||
| − | This Wiki doesn't have a good article rank, so | + | This Wiki doesn't have a good article rank, so I think this system is a good idea. Also, for that reason, if you don't like "comprehensive articles" for the name, we can name them "good articles".[[User:TheUnderfaker|Underfaker]] 19:21, August 5, 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:23, August 5, 2010
| This is a talk page, where you can leave messages and comments about the Comprehensive article nominations project page. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
This is a system I have been proposing for a while now. There are 3 main reasons why I think we should have it:
- It lets readers know when an article contains all relevant information (Even without the stub tag, how does a reader still know what they are reading is complete? When you go to a Wiki that you are not familiar with, do you know?)
- It gives ALL articles something to aspire to. I think this system will give editors the desire to want to flesh-out all articles on the Wiki, not just those that can obtain featured status.
- Uniformity among the Wiki - Isn't the point of a Wiki (besides having fun) to get all its subject matter complete?
Those are my reasonings.
Whatever the case, if we're going to have this, we need an icon (similar to Wikipedia's featured-article gold star), to go in the right-hand corner of an article that says it has obtained comprehensive article status. I was thinking a Duff Beer can.
We also need some determining criteria for a CA. I was thinking each project could have their own (I'd decide on Locations) or, the same criteria for all articles.
This Wiki doesn't have a good article rank, so I think this system is a good idea. Also, for that reason, if you don't like "comprehensive articles" for the name, we can name them "good articles".Underfaker 19:21, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
