Forum:Revising Featured article process: Difference between revisions
(Created page with '{{Forumheader|Panopticon}} <!-- 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'…') |
(thoughts on Feature Article revamp and newly crafted policy and other things) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
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. | |||
: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) | |||
Revision as of 12:57, 25 October 2009
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.
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)
