Memory Beta:Nominations for featured articles

Nominations for featured articles is for nominating the best articles on the entire site. The articles are expected to be complete, and examine the point thoroughly. It is expected that spelling, citations, and standard style problems have already been fixed, and a picture never hurts if it is available.

At current, the Memory Beta is still building its database from the ground up, so there probably won't be many fully complete articles in the near future. We're also still building on our list of members, so the voting process may be slow if it is ever gotten around to, please be patient with us during these times.

Any user may nominate an article for featured status, and you may nominate an article contributed to solely by you, how ever you must be a signed up member. IP users are not permitted to nominate, nor vote in this process. Please do not forget to sign your nominations, so we can confirm this.

This is the discussion and voting page for featured article nominations. After an article has entered discussion, featuredcandidate should be placed on the article. Once an article is approved, change the template to FeaturedArticle.

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 two weeks after the article's nomination, that article has 3 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.
 * 3) If you object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved.
 * 4) As stated above, any objections will be reviewed by the nominator, supporters, and anyone willing to improve the article, and action will be taken to satisfy the objectors.
 * 5) Once all objectors' complaints have been solved (or the article has 3 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".

Also remember to add featuredcandidate at the top of the article you are nominating.

Each month the next article in the queue will be highlighted on the Main Page as featured, and removed from the list of nominations. The beginning of the article then appears on the Main Page via the featured article template. Nominees that are inactive for two months will be eliminated from the nominations list.

Sample article title
Supports
 * 1) User:1
 * 2) User:2
 * 3) User:3

Objections
 * I think there are too many red links. --User:1
 * Formatting should be fixed. --User:2

Comments
 * Lots of great text and pics, worthy of the title. --User:1
 * Very well thought out article. --User:2
 * Formatting has been fixed and looks spot on! --3
 * Okay cool - that was my only objection. --4

Supports
 * 1) 8of5 01:29, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

Comments
 * Looks like The doctor has been a busy boy with this one, and I just went in and filled in anything else I could find on the subject, so unless anyone else knows of some glaring omissions I think it's pretty well covered. --8of5 01:29, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

Gods of Night
Supports
 * 1) Captain Savar 20:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Captain MKB 14:08, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

Comments
 * I don't know if this counts as a "self-nomination", but I think the article is fairly comprehensive and complete. The only thing I could see being an objection would be the large number of redlinks in the "other" section, but I hope people will add information for those as they see fit.  --Captain Savar 20:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Great job. And it's almost there, but there are a couple of gaps; As you noted, there are quite a few red links, and I personally don’t consider a page like this complete until all the links are blue. Also the related stories section is empty, when it should list and detail links to the rest of the trilogy, various TNG relaunch and Titan books, Kobayashi Maru, Ships of the Line and doubtless various other references to all sorts of episodes and novels. --8of5 20:40, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input; I'll work on those redlinks. As for the references - as one who hasn't read the ENT or Titan novels, nor many of the relaunch books... not sure what I can do there.  I'll consider what I can to add, but maybe I'll have to rely on the rest of the community for those connections.  --Captain Savar 03:33, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't feel red links have anything to do with the quality of the article -- the question is about whether the summary, references and appendices are fully expanded and in good condition. The color of the links shows deficiency in those other articles, not the novel article itself. -- Captain MKB 14:08, October 15, 2009 (UTC)
 * I feel on pages for novels/comics/etc the colour of the links in the reference section is quite important, because these pages mainly exist as a gateway to that information.
 * However the red links in the references sections are more obscure subjects so I wouldn't vote against it entirely on that, it's just a criticism. My main issue and the reason I don’t think this can be featured yet is that the "related stories" section is completely empty, on what is a very well connected novel; that's a big gap in the appendices.
 * I also have a concern about the format of the summary, I find the paragraphs headed with dates in brackets a bit odd... --8of5 23:38, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * It's like judging the structural integrity of a building based on whether or not the buildings around it are painted yet or not, it's ridiculous. Nothing to do with the article, and an unnecessary artificial requirement that explains why so few articles get featured here.


 * I'd agree with the part about 'related stories' and 'summary' - expand, and streamline. -- Captain MKB 10:01, October 29, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, this discussion is only eight months old (or overdue depending on your perspective). It's probably obvious that I haven't had the time to really be on this wiki a lot lately.  I think that with a little bit of effort, this could be a good article.  In regards to the format of the summary, how would you recommend breaking up the paragraphs of a novel that jumps through time in different timelines?  I considered breaking it up into the actual time periods (all the 2160s stuff together, etc), but doing so ruins some of the later plot elements...  --Captain Savar 01:28, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

Archives

 * 2006 archive
 * 2007 archive
 * 2008 archive
 * 2009 archive