Wiki 24

Wiki 24:Featured article candidates

6,721pages on
this wiki

Featured Articles are examples of some of the best work available on Wiki 24, and are highlighed on the main page for three months. Criteria for a featured article are that it is well-written, informative, accurate, and that it covers all available information on the subject. The article must also be undisputed and stable, without any on-going edit wars or major disputes. Any previously featured articles are ineligible for nomination unless they have been given a very substantial update in content. Previously nominated articles (stored in this page's History) can be nominated again if they've failed to become featured. To update the wiki to reflect a new winner, follow this documentation.

Eligible voters and the nomination process Edit

Any registered user that has been in existence for at least two weeks and with at least twenty significant contributions can vote on nominations. To nominate an article, add it to the list below, including the reason(s) why you think it should be nominated. When voting, write "SUPPORT" or "OPPOSE" beneath the nomination with your reasons. Each person gets one Support and one Oppose vote per 3 month period. The deadline is 12:00am (UTC) on the second day of the month. You must be logged in when voting and you must sign your vote by adding "~~~~".

Example: Character X Edit

  • SUPPORT: I'd like to nominate this article because it is well written, has the right number of images, and has been collaborated on by numerous trusted contributors. --User X 20:34, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT: Yup, I agree: it's a high-quality article and would represent our work well on the front page. -- User Y 21:56, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
  • OPPOSE: No way, this is rubbish! I found a few typos and formatting errors. -- User Z 22:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for April, May, June 2014 Edit

  • 24: The Game - This is getting rather close. And shocking that this has never been featured before! Surely this is a strong candidate? Well fleshed out article, lots to read, good image structure, and a nice piece of expanded media to show the detailed reach of the Wiki? --SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 22:48, March 26, 2014 (UTC)
    • SUPPORT: Agree with you SignorSimon. --Station7 (talk) 23:15, March 26, 2014 (UTC)
    • SUPPORT: Yeah, it looks good to me, I support!--Acer4666 (talk) 11:26, March 27, 2014 (UTC)
    • COMMENT: I like this nomination a lot, but considering that 24 returns in April, I don't know if we should look for a more mainstream article than the videogame. I don't know which, but it would be cool to see some suggestions. If not, then we can go forward with this one. Thief12 (talk) 00:42, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
      • Honestly, why not just make it 24: Live Another Day? We've done a pretty terrific job of keeping up to date and making it a go-to source for the latest news. Otherwise, I think it would be good to feature a cast or crew member this time. Sean Callery? --Pyramidhead (talk) 01:16, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
      • I would support the LAD page--Scott.mck (talk) 18:23, March 30, 2014 (UTC)
    • OPPOSE: I'm not simply opposing this Game nomination because I'm supporting the LAD nomination below; if you look, a huge preponderance of the Game images violate our own image policy. We really shouldn't be using content that violates policy as a centerpiece. I would however be very comfortable supporting The Game nomination for the next round, after we feature LAD on the Main Page for the next few months, and after its images are finally corrected after all these years. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 03:37, March 31, 2014 (UTC)
    • OPPOSE: For the above reasons. Thief12 (talk) 00:09, April 1, 2014 (UTC)
  • 24: Live Another Day - Like I said, although I like Simon's nom for 24: The Game, I think we should take advantage of the return of the show with a more mainstream article, and I think Pyramidhead's suggestion was spot on. It's a very complete and detailed article, and we just couldn't get more current. Thief12 (talk) 22:22, March 30, 2014 (UTC)
    • SUPPORT: Until now, I haven't been checking the LAD page much. It is awesome indeed. It's got videos, carefully-sourced references, and it's timely. Our The Game page is no slouch, either, especially since it's been around longer and has had lots of attention... but it violates the image policy, does not show off our ability to ref, features no vids, and since it is about a 8-year-old PS2 game, it doesn't have the timeliness factor of LAD. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 03:37, March 31, 2014 (UTC)
Advertisement | Your ad here

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki