Forum:Revising Featured article process: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
No edit summary |
m (Robot: Unlinking "Tardis:Nominations for featured articles") |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{archive|Panopticon archives}}  | ||
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | ||
I'm proposing a revision of the 'Featured article' process. | I'm proposing a revision of the 'Featured article' process. | ||
It's been stalled for a lengthy amount of time. | It's been stalled for a lengthy amount of time. | ||
I'm suggesting removing the rather large featured article banners and re-writing the criteria for a featured article. | I'm suggesting removing the rather large featured article banners and re-writing the criteria for a featured article. | ||
Tardis:Nominations for featured articles is the current page/criteria for the Feature articles. There's nothing wrong with it, except as I've said it's stalled. | |||
The criteria and process is a somewhat lengthy process, which works on high traffic wikis, though perhaps for now we should adopt a faster process. | The criteria and process is a somewhat lengthy process, which works on high traffic wikis, though perhaps for now we should adopt a faster process. | ||
[[User:Tangerineduel/Featured article nomination]] this is the change I'm proposing. It's shorter, has less requirements and basically follows the quote of the week model. | [[User:Tangerineduel/Featured article nomination]] this is the change I'm proposing. It's shorter, has less requirements and basically follows the quote of the week model. | ||
I know that going via this method would possibly lead to some dud articles being nominated, though hopefully there would always be an alternate good article nominated and voted for. The voting specifics I'd grab from the quote of the week policy. | I know that going via this method would possibly lead to some dud articles being nominated, though hopefully there would always be an alternate good article nominated and voted for. The voting specifics I'd grab from the quote of the week policy. | ||
Going this method would lead to a higher turn over of featured articles, much like the quote of the week. Thoughts? --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 13:05, October 12, 2009 (UTC) | Going this method would lead to a higher turn over of featured articles, much like the quote of the week. Thoughts? --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 13:05, October 12, 2009 (UTC) | ||
:Hey all. I've updated the proposed policy for the changed Feature Article see [[User:Tangerineduel/Featured article nomination|here]] for the full text. The sections in capitals that say "FEATURE ARTICLE TIME" and "VOTING TIME" refer to how long the feature article should run for. | :Hey all. I've updated the proposed policy for the changed Feature Article see [[User:Tangerineduel/Featured article nomination|here]] for the full text. The sections in capitals that say "FEATURE ARTICLE TIME" and "VOTING TIME" refer to how long the feature article should run for. | ||
:Just curious on thoughts, both on the suggestion as a whole and specifically how long the Feature Article be featured for. Weekly, Monthly, some other period of time? --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 12:57, October 25, 2009 (UTC) | :Just curious on thoughts, both on the suggestion as a whole and specifically how long the Feature Article be featured for. Weekly, Monthly, some other period of time? --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 12:57, October 25, 2009 (UTC) | ||
I suggest it should be Monthly as quote of week is what it says what it is on tin lol also its a featured article so Its quite special to see each month thats why i think it should be monthly [[User:Michael Downey|Michael Downey]] 13:05, October 25, 2009 (UTC) | I suggest it should be Monthly as quote of week is what it says what it is on tin lol also its a featured article so Its quite special to see each month thats why i think it should be monthly [[User:Michael Downey|Michael Downey]] 13:05, October 25, 2009 (UTC) | ||
::As there's been no objects to this revamp (or if there are still no objections) I'll go ahead with my proposed changes to try and get this working. I've changed the [[User:Tangerineduel/Featured article nomination|proposed policy]] to be a monthly Feature Article. | ::As there's been no objects to this revamp (or if there are still no objections) I'll go ahead with my proposed changes to try and get this working. I've changed the [[User:Tangerineduel/Featured article nomination|proposed policy]] to be a monthly Feature Article. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 13:05, November 5, 2009 (UTC) | ||
[[category:policy changers]] | |||
Latest revision as of 02:31, 9 June 2013
Forums → Archive index → Panopticon archives → Revising Featured article process
 
I'm proposing a revision of the 'Featured article' process.
It's been stalled for a lengthy amount of time. I'm suggesting removing the rather large featured article banners and re-writing the criteria for a featured article.
Tardis:Nominations for featured articles is the current page/criteria for the Feature articles. There's nothing wrong with it, except as I've said it's stalled. The criteria and process is a somewhat lengthy process, which works on high traffic wikis, though perhaps for now we should adopt a faster process.
User:Tangerineduel/Featured article nomination this is the change I'm proposing. It's shorter, has less requirements and basically follows the quote of the week model.
I know that going via this method would possibly lead to some dud articles being nominated, though hopefully there would always be an alternate good article nominated and voted for. The voting specifics I'd grab from the quote of the week policy.
Going this method would lead to a higher turn over of featured articles, much like the quote of the week. Thoughts? --Tangerineduel 13:05, October 12, 2009 (UTC)
- Hey all. I've updated the proposed policy for the changed Feature Article see here for the full text. The sections in capitals that say "FEATURE ARTICLE TIME" and "VOTING TIME" refer to how long the feature article should run for.
- Just curious on thoughts, both on the suggestion as a whole and specifically how long the Feature Article be featured for. Weekly, Monthly, some other period of time? --Tangerineduel 12:57, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
I suggest it should be Monthly as quote of week is what it says what it is on tin lol also its a featured article so Its quite special to see each month thats why i think it should be monthly Michael Downey 13:05, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
- As there's been no objects to this revamp (or if there are still no objections) I'll go ahead with my proposed changes to try and get this working. I've changed the proposed policy to be a monthly Feature Article. --Tangerineduel 13:05, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
