Assassin's Creed Wiki:Good Article Nominations

File:Ganomsistrutt1.png

Bureau

Nominations Hub

Good article nominations

Featured article nominations

Recruitment

This page lists all the nominations for Good status. The Istruttori monitor this page and the voting process.

---

What makes an Good Article good? We knew you would ask that, so the answer follows:

An article must…

• …be well-written and detailed.
• …be unbiased, non-point of view.
• …be sourced with all available sources and appearances.
• …follow the Manual of Style, Layout Guide, and all other policies on ACWiki.
• …not be tagged with any sort of improvement tags, except {{FAimp}}.
• …have a proper lead, with a undetailed resume of the article's contents.
• …have no more than 6 redlinks and none in the introduction, infobox, or any templates.
• …have significant information from all sources and appearances, especially a biography for character articles.
• …provide at least one quote on the article.
• …preferably include a "personality and characteristics" section on all character articles.
• …include at least 2 images of sufficient quality to illustrate the article, if said images are available.
• …preferably have a "behind the scenes" section when the info if available
• …pass review by the Istruttorium review panel.

If the article meets at least 5 of the prerequisites, the article is permitted to be held for nomination.

---

How to nominate:

1. First, nominate an article you find is worthy of featured status, putting it at the bottom of the list below; see criteria above. Note that a previously featured article cannot be featured on the Main Page again; however, it can be restored to featured status.
2. Others will object to the nomination if they disagree that the article is good enough; they will then supply reasons for doing so, and ways to improve the article (errors, style, organization, images, notability, sources).
3. Supporters adjust the article until the objectors (with reasonable objections) are satisfied.
4. The article is placed on the good article list and added to the front page queue.
5. Also, if, at least a week after the article's nomination, that article has 3 Istruttore supports and no objections (or the objections have been stricken or overridden), it will be added to the queue, and will be officially known as a "good article."

How to vote:

1. Before doing anything, be sure to read the article completely, keeping a sharp eye out for mistakes.
2. Afterwards, compare the article to the criteria listed above, and then either support or object the article's nomination.
3. Please note that in order for your vote to count, you must have 50 mainspace edits.
   1. If you object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved. Please cite which rule your objection falls under, if possible. Failure to do so may result in your objection being considered invalid.
4. As stated above, any objections will be looked upon by the nominator, supporters, and anyone willing to improve the article, and action will be taken to please the objectors. Do not strike other users' objections; it is up to the objector to review the changes and strike if they are satisfied.
5. Once the article has five supporting Istruttori votes and no outstanding objections after at least a week, the article will be added to the queue and be officially known as a "good article." Although articles do not need regular users' votes to pass, non-Istruttori are encouraged to review articles and participate in the process.

Also remember to add {{NomG}} at the top of the article you are nominating.

Archives: 1 - 2 - 3

Talal - Yay

6 days and 5 Staff votes.. --Vatsa (talk • Gentek) 03:07, November 30, 2011 (UTC)

Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.

I seem to be rushing these articles through, but seeing as they all seem to do quite well in the voting process, I see no reason to stop my work yet. I fixed the final words section, sourced the images, removed the unneeded video, replaced some images and did some general rewording. I think this one is good enough for GA as well. Nesty Contact me! 08:43, November 24, 2011 (UTC) Yay As nominator/revamper. Nesty Contact me! 08:43, November 24, 2011 (UTC) Nice article. Nostalgia AC Let's talk 15:15, November 24, 2011 (UTC) Bam. -- Master Sima Yi 21:46, November 24, 2011 (UTC) Yay. --Jack WallsSupermen 16:48, November 25, 2011 (UTC) Got no complaints here. --Teller Words, On my Screen :O 22:40, November 26, 2011 (UTC) Nice. -- 'R BlaiddDdraig Enter... THE SCARY DOOR 07:01, November 27, 2011 (UTC) Yep, looks good. =GuardDog 02:39, November 29, 2011 (UTC) Nay Comments

Abu'l Nuqoud - Voting

Another nomination from me. I have fixed the articles sourcing, sourced images, added new images (Thanks to Vatsa), cleaned up the trivia, fixed the formatting in the final words section, fixed some info in the infobox and did the general rewording. I believe it to be ready, if you do not, tell me why and I'll see to it that it's fixed. Nesty ^{Contact me!} 22:07, November 26, 2011 (UTC)

Yay

1. As nominator/revamper Nesty ^{Contact me!} 22:07, November 26, 2011 (UTC)
2. Looks good. --Teller ^{Words, On my Screen :O} 22:40, November 26, 2011 (UTC)
3. Alright. -- 'R BlaiddDdraig ^{Enter... THE SCARY DOOR} 07:01, November 27, 2011 (UTC)
4. Did minor wording edits, but still a yay from me. =GuardDog 02:39, November 29, 2011 (UTC)
5. I did some minor grammar work, good article though. Nostalgia ^{Let's talk.} 03:24, November 30, 2011 (UTC)

Nay

Comments

Emilio Barbarigo - Voting

I revamped and expanded on this article, adding personality and early life sections, as well as cleaning up the rest of the article. I've spoken with Guard, and he agrees after a few suggestions. Nostalgia ^{Let's talk.} 15:10, November 28, 2011 (UTC)

Yay

1. As nominator. Nostalgia ^{Let's talk.} 15:10, November 28, 2011 (UTC)
2. Did some rewording/MoS related stuff, and it seems fine now. Nesty ^{Contact me!} 19:22, November 28, 2011 (UTC)
3. Well done. -- 'R BlaiddDdraig ^{Enter... THE SCARY DOOR} 02:26, November 29, 2011 (UTC)
4. All my comments have been covered. =GuardDog 02:39, November 29, 2011 (UTC)

Nay

Comments

William of Montferrat - Voting

Oh dear, another one? Yes. Another one. Let's see.... I did pretty much the same as I did to the other articles. Go ahead and vote. If you don't think it is good enough, tell me why and I'll make sure to fix it. Nesty ^{Contact me!} 19:41, November 29, 2011 (UTC)

Yay

1. As revamper/nominator Nesty ^{Contact me!} 19:41, November 29, 2011 (UTC)
2. My comments have been covered. Nostalgia ^{Let's talk.} 21:20, November 30, 2011 (UTC)

Nay

Comments

1. In my opinion the biography section needs to be subdivided, and the opening quote for that section needs to either be shortened (or replaced if it loses its meaning when shortened). It could also use some more images from when William is inside the citadel for the gallery. Lastly, I believe that the image from the final words section should be made smaller, and a medium sized image inserted into the personality section, if it makes sense there. Those are just my thoughts on the article, but do those, and I'll vote Yay. Nostalgia ^{Let's talk.} 03:21, November 30, 2011 (UTC)
2. I did as you asked, mostly. Biography has been subdivided, quote has been replaced by a shorter one, though it gives less explanation. Final death image has been made smaller as well. An image in the personality section would both be senseless and would ruin the articles lay-out unnecessarily. I'll request more images from Vatsa when I meet him on the IRC. Nesty ^{Contact me!} 08:38, November 30, 2011 (UTC)

Majd Addin - Voting

Same story as the ones above. did everything I did to them, and if you are not content, tell me why so that I can fix it. Nesty ^{Contact me!} 09:19, December 1, 2011 (UTC)

Yay

1. As revamper/nominator --Nesty ^{Contact me!} 09:19, December 1, 2011 (UTC)

Nay

Comments