Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured Topics in Wikipedia A featured topic is a collection of inter-related articles that are of a good quality (though are not necessarily featured articles). This page is for the nomination of potential featured topics. Here we determine which topics are featured on Featured topics. A featured topic should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work. See "what is a featured topic?" for criteria. If you would like to ask any questions about your topic and the featured topic process before submitting it, visit Wikipedia talk:Featured topic candidates. If you nominate a topic, you will be expected to make a good-faith effort to address objections that are raised. If you nominate something you have worked on, note it as a self-nomination. You may wish to receive feedback before nominating a topic by listing it at Peer review. Consensus must be reached for a group to be promoted to featured topic status. If enough time passes without objections being resolved, nominations will be removed from the candidates topic and archived. Purge the cache to refresh this page	Shortcut: WP:FTC Featured content: Featured articles Featured pictures Featured lists Featured portals Featured topics ← Featured sounds Featured topic tools: Featured topic criteria Featured topic candidates Featured topic removal candidates Nomination procedure Featured topic log Former featured topics
Nomination procedure For how to nominate topics or how to add articles to existing topics, see Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Nomination procedure. Supporting and objecting Please read all the articles of the nominated topic fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination. To edit nominations in order to comment on them, you must click the "edit" link to the right of the article nomination on which you wish to comment (not the overall page's "edit this page" link). If you approve of a nomination, write '''Support''' followed by your reasons. If you oppose a nomination, write '''Object''' followed by the reason for your objection. Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to "fix" the source of the objection, the objection may be ignored. This includes objections to an article's suitability for the Wikipedia Main Page, unless such suitability can be fixed (featured articles, despite being featured, may be marked so as not to be showcased on the Main Page). To withdraw an objection, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it. For a topic to be promoted to featured topic status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. If enough time passes without objections being resolved, nominations will be removed from the candidates list and archived. Nominations will stay here for ten days if there is unanimous consent, or longer if warranted by debate.

Contents 1 Nominations 1.1 Star Wars episodes 1.2 North Carolina hurricanes 1.3 Meerkat Manor 2 Removal candidates

[edit] Nominations

Please add new nominations to the top.

[edit] Star Wars episodes

Main page	Articles
Star Wars	Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace - Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones - Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith - Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope - Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back - Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi

I am rebooting this Featured Topic. I can't believe it wasn't done sooner, considering the high concentration of geeks on here :) Just an FYI to everyone, I primarily worked on pushing Star Wars to WP:GA status. Gary King (talk) 04:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• Strong Support - Glad to see it back, and meeting the criteria for once! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:45, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
• Support. Well done to Gary in dealing with the prior issue (this one) and getting it up to criteria. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 05:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
• Comment Why not "Star Wars films"? WesleyDodds (talk) 11:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I think that they are making it so that they don't have to include the Ewoks films or the holiday special. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 00:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
• Support great to have it back! Congrats on making that mess in Star Wars a GA, Gary! And isn't films because it's the old FT title, the category and there are other movies. igordebraga ≠ 15:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
• Support Two things: the articles's talk pages were never changed to indicate that the topic was demoted and this nomination should have a different name. Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 17:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
• Support – Meets the requirements. Nice to see this finally back, I know that its wikiproject has been putting in a lot of work. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 00:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
• Strong SupportTotally meets the requirements.Xp54321 (talk) 02:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Support Not a big Star Wars fan, I'm forced to watch it by my son, but the articles themselves deserve to be part of a FT as they meet all the criteria. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 04:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Support This is a great article and meets the requirements,plus I'm a big fan.71.118.125.165 (talk) 15:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
• Support - looks good, meets the relevant criteria. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 18:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
• Comment How many supports does it take for the article to become featured? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xp54321 (talk • contribs) 00:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Consensus much be reached for a nomination to pass. Also, please do not add a Featured Article star to these articles when they have not yet reached that status. Gary King (talk) 00:37, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
    • How quick those edits were reverted demonstrates why quality versions only needs auto confered user an not a new user level. Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 01:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Support A great article, we just need to deal with potential vandalism.Pc12345 (talk) 04:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
• Support. You will promote this topic to featured status. Cirt (talk) 09:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Support I agree with Cirt,You will promote this topic to featured status.Herowiki101 (talk) 16:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC) -- — Herowiki101 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Just a word of warning to everyone that the above comment was made by a newly created account, with the only edit (besides their user space) to be this one. Gary King (talk) 19:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] North Carolina hurricanes

Main page	Articles
List of North Carolina hurricanes	List of North Carolina hurricanes (pre-1900) - List of North Carolina hurricanes (1900-1949) - List of North Carolina hurricanes (1950-1979) - List of North Carolina hurricanes (1980-present)

Finally, there's a sequel to the Florida hurricanes topic. Every list is either featured, or on FLC. There are no gaps, and they're all inter-connected. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Update - List of North Carolina hurricanes (1900-1949) is now featured. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:06, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

• Conditional support - Damn, Hurricanehink, you never quit. Well done, they even all have matching charts at the bottom. Pending the FLC of the 1950-1979 list you have my support. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 04:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
• Conditional support - based on when the last two pass FLC, though I am 100% certain that they will. --PresN (talk) 05:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Conditional support as long as current article in FLC passes you have my support. Well done. 02blythed (talk) 11:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose per criteria: "The topic should not have any … Featured list candidates,… when nominated for featured topic. Please have all required processes done before nominating." Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 19:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

  Hurricanehink certainly committed a faut-pas by submitting it early, but I don't think that is worth opposing on that ground when it is very likely that the last article will pass. A conditional support seems reasonable. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 20:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

  I'm willing to cut the guy some slack in this regard, mainly because he has to his credit 36 FAs, 15 FLs, and 3 FTs, none of which have ever been de-listed. Honestly, at this point when he nominates something, I just assume it will pass. --PresN (talk) 21:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

  Heh, thanks. I knew the FTC nom would take longer than the FLC's to pass. As both FLC noms already have supports, I chose not to wait another few weeks. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Conditional support - will gladly provide full support when the remaining non-featured items pass WP:FLC. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 23:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Conditional support on the same condition as Sephiroth. Otherwise, he never quits, he'll write till he's done. Anyway, I guess 4 FTs isn't bad for 1 user. ^Mitch32^contribs 02:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
• Support - the two remaining articles are of high quality, so no need for the "conditional" here. The 1900-1949 list is well on its way to passing FLC, and the topic's main page satisfies all the criteria for {{A-Class}} in WP:WPTC, so I've tagged it that way. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 06:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Per the criteria A-class is not enough. Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 21:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

If I understand WP:WIAFT correctly, it is, per criterion 3(c). It is impossible for the list to become a good article, so the other conditions apply. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 03:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

• Support - I agree with Titoxd, no need for being conditional, articles not featured are of very high quality. Hello32020 (talk) 03:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
• Conditional support on the remaining non FLs passing. Even if they are of high quality, they can't be "officially" identified as such because GA and A status doesn't apply to lists. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 05:14, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

  That's true for GA's, but not for A-Class pages. A-Class status is designated by WikiProjects, and the assessment scale gives two options to WikiProjects: the first one is to use {{List-Class}}, and the other one is to assess lists using the full FA/A/GA/B/Start/Stub scale. WikiProject Tropical cyclones assesses all of its lists, and does not make use of the List-Class rating. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 05:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

  Ah. I'm not really involved in projects, which is why I didn't know. Though it is good to know that's how they become A rated. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 06:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Support Agreed with Titoxd and Hello32020. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Meerkat Manor

Main page	Articles
Meerkat Manor	List of Meerkat Manor episodes - List of Meerkat Manor meerkats

I am nominating these three articles as I feel they meet all of the qualifications for being a featured topic on the television series Meerkat Manor. Meerkat Manor is a featured article and the two lists are featured lists. Collectonian (talk) 22:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• Per the criteria, the articles should be linked using a template. I'd suggest one of those navboxes at the bottom of each page
• List of Meerkat Manor episodes has a sentence that begins with "Also" in the lead, which need correcting

Once that's done I'll be happy to support. Nice work. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 00:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• The criteria says "preferably using a template", but doesn't mandate. For only three articles, a template seems like overkill. Meerkat Manor links to the lists using regular main links, and both lists are well wikified with one another through "See Also" links and links throughout the text. There are some other featured topics with only 2 or 3 articles that have no templates. :) It does, however, say they should share a common category so I have fixed that.

• The "Also" sentence in the episode list has been fixed. Collectonian (talk) 00:17, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• My apologies. I have only recently begun to involve myself in the FT area. As promised, I now support. I have no problems with any of the articles, having supported at least 1 of them, they are a complete topic, and they meet every point in the criteria—which I have re-read! :) -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 05:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Support A small topic, but it meets the criteria. –thedemonhog talk • edits 01:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Support. bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 03:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
• Support - yes, a template isn't 100% necessary, no other issues. All featured, which is nice. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 03:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose I can not find where List of Meerkat Manor episodes is linked to in the text of the lead article. I can only find it in the info box. If I can not find it after looking for it a few times, the average reader will not go to this article! Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 12:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I have added a "See also" section for this. Like Collectonian, I consider a nav template for just three articles an odd choice. – sgeureka ^t•c 13:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
    • I removed the see also since it is wikified in the article, but to address the concern, I've added a clearer link in the meerkats section. Will that work as well? Collectonian (talk) 14:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
      • Support concern addressed. Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 19:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Support - looks good. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Support - meets all of the relevant criteria. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 23:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
• Support. Per thedemonhog (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 09:43, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removal candidates

None at this time.