Forum:Which one article is our best?: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
OttselSpy25 (talk | contribs) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
I think it's an article we can be proud to share with people who know nothing about ''Doctor Who''. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 06:08: Fri 02 Nov 2012</span> | I think it's an article we can be proud to share with people who know nothing about ''Doctor Who''. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 06:08: Fri 02 Nov 2012</span> | ||
: [[Companion]] is a good suggestion. All your reasons are good but I especially like your fifth point about its unexpectedness. One thing I have against it (which is fixable) is that I don't think any page we send in should have one of the "please fix this page" tags, and this one has the "additional sources needed" tag. If we can fix this up, then I support this one for nomination. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 13:46, November 2, 2012 (UTC) | : [[Companion]] is a good suggestion. All your reasons are good but I especially like your fifth point about its unexpectedness. One thing I have against it (which is fixable) is that I don't think any page we send in should have one of the "please fix this page" tags, and this one has the "additional sources needed" tag. If we can fix this up, then I support this one for nomination. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 13:46, November 2, 2012 (UTC) | ||
::Illegitimate use of {{tlx|facts}}. Removed. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 06:04: Sun 04 Nov 2012</span> | |||
: I think the page is great because of it's non-biased appearance. Too many of our pages are New-Series biassed or just TV story biased. This article, however, successfully has New Series images, Classic Series images, and comic images; perfectly summing up what we aim for in a page. [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]] ([[User Talk:OttselSpy25|talk to me, baby.]]) 03:28, November 4, 2012 (UTC) | : I think the page is great because of it's non-biased appearance. Too many of our pages are New-Series biassed or just TV story biased. This article, however, successfully has New Series images, Classic Series images, and comic images; perfectly summing up what we aim for in a page. [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]] ([[User Talk:OttselSpy25|talk to me, baby.]]) 03:28, November 4, 2012 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 06:04, 4 November 2012
Index → Panopticon → Which one article is our best?
Spoilers are strongly policed here.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.
Wikia are having a bit of a promotion whereby each wiki in the network nominates the one article that they think is the best example of their work. This article then gets featured in a variety of different and prominent ways, thereby driving traffic to our site. We'll definitely be participating in this scheme — but the question is, which is our best article with which to introduce people to our wiki?
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 06:08: Fri 02 Nov 2012
Nominations
Place your nominations here — each in a new section — giving your reasons (or counterarguments).
Companion
I think companion showcases one of the central concepts of Doctor Who, but does so in a way that:
- is fully illustrated
- has a balanced approach to in-universe and out-of-universe concerns
- gives citations for almost every assertion
- is very well wikified — which means people might stay longer on our site because of all the links they can immediately click
- is slightly unexpected, because it's not Doctor Who or the Doctor or the Doctor's TARDIS
- could potentially lead people outside our main namespace, because of the links to various forum discussions
I think it's an article we can be proud to share with people who know nothing about Doctor Who.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 06:08: Fri 02 Nov 2012
- Companion is a good suggestion. All your reasons are good but I especially like your fifth point about its unexpectedness. One thing I have against it (which is fixable) is that I don't think any page we send in should have one of the "please fix this page" tags, and this one has the "additional sources needed" tag. If we can fix this up, then I support this one for nomination. Shambala108 ☎ 13:46, November 2, 2012 (UTC)
- I think the page is great because of it's non-biased appearance. Too many of our pages are New-Series biassed or just TV story biased. This article, however, successfully has New Series images, Classic Series images, and comic images; perfectly summing up what we aim for in a page. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 03:28, November 4, 2012 (UTC)
