Talk:Holocron:Featured Articles

From Holocron - Star Wars Combine
Revision as of 07:45, 24 November 2017 by Ubis Vrand (talk | contribs) (Suggestions)
Jump to: navigation, search

Selection Process

As there was a general agreement that we need a more formal selection process (see below), from now on articles need to go through the following steps:

  • Everyone can suggest articles, please enter them in the "Suggestions" section of this page. Put a link and sign your suggestion.
  • On the 15th day of each month all current suggestions will be pasted to the "Vote" section. Every user can give support to one article every month. Every article can be discussed in the "Recent Discussion" section. The article that gets most votes on the 15th of next month will be featured next.
  • The article will be deleted from the "suggestions" list as soon as it is featured.--Dreighton 01:00, 17 April 2014 (GMT)
  • Articles that have previously been featured should not be nominated again unless they have undergone significant changes since they were last featured. --Syn 02:24, 23 November 2017 (CST)


In this section you can post candidates to be featured. Please do not discuss the suggestions here, so that the list stays short and crisp. You can use the "Recent Discussion" section to talk about articles that are currently voted on.--Dreighton 01:00, 17 April 2014 (GMT)


This is the vote for the featured article for next month:

Next featured article

Article Suggestions - Discussion

Does anyone have article suggestions for the months of August, September, and October 2013? We need a few article candidates. =P -- Rupert Havok 22:27, 22 July 2013 (GMT)

We should consider a general theme for those months (like the three big galactic blocs) and then take the time before the month comes along to improve the candidates. This way first there is a pattern and second we can get together to improve one article at a time. --Raith Starlight 23:51, 22 July 2013 (GMT)
Hmm. I'm not sure if we have enough presentable articles to adopt a general theme approach yet. Most editors only write autobiographical articles instead of more useful articles about important events, alliances, conflicts, etc. I'm having difficulty finding articles for the upcoming January and February months.... -- Rupert Havok
Does anyone have any pages (other than their own biographies) that they wish to nominate as a Featured Article? So far, Vorsia Companion seems to be a decent candidate... -- Rupert Havok 01:04, 1 January 2014 (GMT)
Elvira Falston seems to be on her way to creating a solid biography, though it isn't complete. It's definitely something to watch for the future. The New Republic article also seems on its way. -- Kyran Caelius 20:56, 13 January 2014 (GMT)
Okay... I guess we can go with NR this month (February) and Elvira's next month? --- Rupert Havok 18:01, 1 February 2014 (GMT)
Either/or being first would definitely work. I think they're both good articles at this point (better than those which haven't been featured, and are available, that is). -- Kyran Caelius 18:56, 1 February 2014 (GMT)
So what do we have for next month? There's a few good ones out there. IMO it doesn't need to be a perfect article to be highlighted.-- Wolfgang von Schlavendorf 16:31, 21 February 2014 (GMT)
I don't know if it is up to the quality of a featured article, but I can propose the Baobab Merchant Fleet article. There is a lot of effort and research behind it. --Ruben Wan 16:03, 22 February 2014 (GMT)
Black Sun and Boabab are both good articles. Hmm. Both articles need a few more internal hyper-links. -- Rupert Havok 17:33, 22 February 2014 (GMT)
Black Sun is still a WIP, though I imagine it'll be done in a month's time. I intend to go through and add more internal hyper-links, and potentially images, once I've finalized the remaining couple sections. I also still think Elvira Falston is good, though I understand putting some distance between personal biographies. -- Kyran Caelius 00:52, 24 February 2014 (GMT)
Another month is finished, and we need a GOOD featured article again. Are we going for the Elvira Falston's? Who is in charge to update the featured articles? --Ruben Wan 12:16, 1 April 2014 (GMT)
The consensus process kind of broke down after the Tex Navos/Doc Jessa/Ignatius Paak incident. See the ongoing discussion below. I think we are waiting for Dreighton to implement the proposed selection system for featured articles. -- Rupert Havok 23:20, 1 April 2014 (GMT)
Let's use a prior featured article as a placeholder because that red link in the front page may just be tempting for some people to just add their own articles --Raith Starlight 00:00, 2 April 2014 (GMT)
I am for this as long as we use Feb's article. I think its best we erase March and put this unfortunate incident behind us, which reflects us collectively dropping the ball.
In regards to Nocti's suggestion of Tex Navos, I disagree due to the overly abundant number of broken (red) links. It should be cleaned up quite a bit before being accepted as a candidate for featured article. The same thing goes towards the Falleen Federation and New Imperial Order suggestions. --Tomas o`Cuinn 08:22, 15 December 2014 (GMT)
With the list and suggestions/options dwindling, I agree with Tomas about moderating suggestions a bit better. For example, the current 'next' featured article is the "Tex Navos" article. Prard`aga Rono had stated before, "Definitely agree with the sentiment that [the Tex Navos] article DOES NOT meet the standards we want to set for a holocron article. A few months ago, one of the other editors (Orph or Tylger) lobbied for one of their own articles. We all accepted that article because it met holocron standards for style and quality. This article does NONE of that and reads more like a badly written RP. [...] In the meantime the Tex Navos article should be removed from featured, and even flagged, as it does not conform to holocron standards." No changes have been made to fix the many issues. There are entire sections which are written as an RP. Holocron featured articles should minimally meet general standards, and ideally, be polished beyond the bare minimum. --Kyran Caelius 07:40, 4 June 2015 (GMT)
I think the "Tex Navos" article should be removed from the nomination process, since it not only violates Holocron Standards but the concept Tylger proposed for renominating an article, since it not only STILL contains a massive number of red links, but also has not undergone significant edits since it was last "nominated". -- Prard`aga Rono 08:42, 4 June 2015 (GMT)
I stand with Prard`aga in his suggestion to remove it from the nomination list. -- Cuinn 13:25, 4 June 2015 (GMT)
Just saw this and removed it. I would also like to point out there are a lot of opinions here but nobody actually doing anything. Maybe a little more action to go with said opinions? I am only doing this because nobody else was bothering to do it, unless it was their own page in question, and am simply trying to ensure there is a Featured Article for people to see. I fully support someone qualified stepping up to handle it. -- Fures Nocti 02:40, 6 July 2015 (GMT)

I went with Falleen Federation as it does not have reference links to Wookiepedia like Colonies Ubis Vrand 08:07, 6 July 2015 (GMT)

I don't agree with the Falleen Federation nomination because it's a painfully short article for such an established government and has numerous broken (red) links. I also don't agree with the Colonies nomination because the page has almost no substance. Why should either of these articles be considered a good example to follow? -- Cuinn 04:18, 20 August 2015 (GMT)
I agree with Cuinn. In its current state, the Falleen Federation "stub" shouldn't be featured. My sentiments run deeper though: The Falleen Federation has one of the richest in-game backstories of any government in SWC, bar none. Its IC history spans The Shadowstone Affair to The Battle of Beta to the present. And yet, disappointingly, its current Holocron article is little more than a stub. Kinda sad that no Falleen Federation players have taken the time to write a proper article on their faction and its history. -- Rupert Havok 17:10, 20 August 2015 (GMT)

In regards to Cuinn's suggestion of Emilio Varga, I disagree due to the overly abundant number of broken (red) links. It should be cleaned up quite a bit before being accepted as a candidate for featured article. -- Fures Nocti 09:11, 20 August 2015 (GMT)

I've just cleaned up the broken links, Nocti. Not sure why I suggested it in that state while complaining about the broken links in the Falleen Federation article :P -- Cuinn 16:23, 21 August 2015 (GMT)
I threw the Falleen Federation as the featured article for August - they'll have to settle for having a half month as featured since nobody bothered to do it earlier than now. Their half month reign will reflect the half-assed article they've got. --Cuinn 23:45, 22 August 2015 (GMT)
Would anyone take issue with my suggesting Tomas o`Cuinn? My page has undergone a majority retcon since its previous featured status (previous version seen at Tomas o`Cuinn (featured) with a note). The current version has had the featured status removed and has not been featured. Also, not very many responses popping up in this discussion area... --Cuinn 00:21, 5 October 2015 (GMT)

Changing the presentation style of this page

Rather than merely listing previous featured articles in chronological order, perhaps we should follow the example of Wikipedia's "Featured Articles" section. We could divide the articles chosen thus far into an Archive page and also a broader Categories page... Thoughts? -- Rupert Havok 00:37, 15 October 2013 (GMT)

It's an interesting idea. You sort of already did the Archive style, and though the broader categories would be a bit empty right now, over time that would flesh out a bit. So long as people are capable of finding featured articles with ease, I'd be supportive of it. -- Kyran Caelius 20:16, 13 November 2013 (GMT)
We're doing monthly featured articles so we won't have that much clutter compared to Wikipedia. Like Kyran mentioned, if the interface for browsing is as smooth as Wikipedia's, then I support it as well. --Raith Starlight 16:46, 2 March 2014 (GMT)

Suggested Clean-Up: Move the actual vote-casting to Vote:Holocron:Featured Articles and reserve this page for discussion.

Perhaps we should move the actual vote casting to Vote:Holocron:Featured Articles and reserve this page (Talk:Holocron:Featured Articles) solely for discussion/debate? Currently, this page is quite messy with the balloting process haphazardly occurring in the middle between other conversations. If we create Vote:Holocron:Featured Articles, a "Vote" tab will automatically appear at the top of this page as a shortcut link, alongside the existing "Page," "Discussion," "History" tabs. I'm not suggesting a rule change, but a cleaner division between the voting and the debating. -- Rupert Havok

Much easier if you keep the talk page for voting and clear it every month. Venari Haliat 03:49, 20 August 2015 (GMT)
I'm all for cleaning this page up. Kyran Caelius 14:15, 24 May 2016 (CDT)
I removed some of the outdated sections. Really, there's more content here that doesn't serve much purpose to keep, but we long as we're keeping the voting at the top and the discussion down below, this should be an improvement. --Syn 02:24, 23 November 2017 (CST)