HRWiki talk:Featured Article Nominations

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 04:42, 19 July 2005

So how do these work? Do people just nominate, and our proprietor decides? ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 04:18, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

I was wondering that myself, mostly because I don't understand why stuff like the Floppy Disk page is getting overlooked in favor of shorter articles with very little content. (My picks include: Strong Bad Email, Strong Bad Email Statistics, Stinkoman Enemies, Floppy Disk Container, Halloween Costumes, Original Book) Aurora the Homestar Coder 04:34, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Yea, I'm kinda miffed about Schenectady Crispies. If the page is gonna be around for a whole week, I'd think it'd be big enough to browse for some time. I don't want to see a whole 'nother STUFF, but I think discussion between a few folks, maybe just the sysops or something would be kinda cool. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 04:47, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

I think Schenectady Crispies is a strange pick too, and I have to question Homeschool Winner as the third featured article. It's something that only a few "hardcore" fans have interest in, it's not even on the official site (except for the Dancin' Bubs background). Aurora the Homestar Coder 04:56, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Personally, I think that it would be better to nominate articles that are lesser known, i.e. smaller characters, different locations or objects. Personally I would think that nominating Strong Bad emails wouldnt be quite as useful, as they already see a lot of pageage. But thats just me -- Tony Stony 01:07, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Lesser known, yes. But I think large lesser known pages would be most useful, In My Humble Opinion. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 05:39, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

I think the point is just for the article to be a really good, thorough oneEDSMILDE

I'm listening

Sorry for kinda doing my own thing here. I'm usually very hip to the wiki way, but I guess I got a bit carried away with this thing. Know that I meant no harm. I figured I would just do my own thing until somebody else stepped in and suggested a better way. You guys have got my undivided attention. I've pulled out the featured pages that have been frowned upon, and am open to suggestions on a new nomination process. I don't want this to turn into another STUFF, but I do feel we should have some organized way to discuss articles that have been nominated and come to a consensus about whether they should really be featured or not. — Joey (talk·edits) 14:37, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Joey, I didn't mean to sound mutinous or anything before, I really was just curious. Anyways, I think I already said it before, but I figure that as long as they're up for a week, they should be fairly large pages, to give users a week's worth of browsing/exploring and whatnot. Lesser-known pages are also good, since it may be harder for users to find them (not specific toons or emails, more 'supplementary information', e.g. Floppy Disk Container, Minor Teen Girl Squad Characters, ect). But that's my general opinion. I do appreciate your giving 'Schenectady Crispies' the boot (among others), that coulda been one looooong week... ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 00:17, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Pages like Minor Teen Girl Squad Characters would be hard to put in a summary for the Main Page, though. Though I don't think we should really limit it to just us, but a sysop decission would probably be best, to keep it from being another STUFF. —FireBird|Talk 20:10, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Actually, since each article is just a synopsis about the article, I'm sure we would be able to summarize the page information for such pages as Minor Teen Girl Squad Characters and Floppy Disk Container into an article about them. I could probably figure something out, if such pages are chosen. But yea, we should probably figure out some kind of system for choosing them. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 21:40, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

With only six days remaining with which to choose a new feature article, I think we need to decide some kind of meathod of deciding on it... Right? ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 18:55, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I brought this up over on Da Basement and Firebird suggested, essentially, that the sysops make nominations (based on the nomination page, I suppose) and then they get decided on. I guess this could happen on Da Basement... Homestar Coder 19:55, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Next Week

Okay, it's Friday night. What's going to be the featured article for next week? --ColorPrinter 00:00, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Hello? Is anyone reading this? How about TGS? --ColorPrinter 00:45, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Week 28

I noticed that there is not featured article for week 28 and time is running out. I will most likely pick Teen Girl Squad if there are no objections and no one else steps in with another candidate. After all, it's better than having a big empty space on the left-hand side of the main page! —THE PAPER ^PREEEOW 21:03, 10 Jul 2005 (UTC)

The featured article choices have moved to Da Basement, at least for the time being. Homestar Coder 21:59, 10 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Criteria

I was just looking on Wikipedia, and thought it might be interesting to show their criteria for nominating an article. I'm not saying this has to be exactly followed or anything, but I think in any case it's a good thing to think about when selecting an article for nomination:

• Exemplify HRWiki's very best work. Represent what HRWiki offers that is unique on the Internet.

I think that's the same here.

• Be Comprehensive: Covers the topic in its entirety; does not omit any major facts or details.

Again, I think this is good criteria

• Be Accurate: Supports facts with specifics and external citations. Includes references, arranged in a ==References== section and enhanced by the appropriate use of inline citations.

Not as important, but is something good to think about.

• Be Stable: Should be mostly static, and not change rapidly from day to day.

Since most of our articles are in constant flux, I don't think this is strictly true. But if an article has a definite finishing point, it might be best to wait until that is reached.

• Be Well-written: Compelling, even "brilliant" prose—the former name for featured articles.

Again, quite true.

• Be uncontroversial in its neutrality and factual accuracy, and not have ongoing edit wars.

That means no featuring 'STUFF', heh heh. But seriously, again quite applicible.

• Comply with all of our standards.

We have a good team who ensure all our pages are standardized. But still something to think about.

• Have images where appropriate, with good captions. However, an article does not have to have a picture to be featured.

Most of our articles have very good pictures, I don't think it's something to worry about too much.

• Have an appropriate length. It should stay tightly-focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail. However, excellent short articles are also accepted.

This is an important one for our wiki. Since ours are week long articles, long ones are probably a better choice.

And of course, criteria limited to our wiki, generally it's also good to pick less than obvious articles, which means specific toons, specifically, as a general rule.

⇔Thunderbird⇔ 04:42, 19 Jul 2005 (UTC)