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 is avaiable
…pass review by the Istruttorium review panel.
Failure to meet any one requirement results in cancelation or holding of vote process until requirements can be achieved. Articles in vote with 3 or more GA traits missing results in vote annulment.
How to nominate:
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.
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).
Supporters adjust the article until the objectors (with reasonable objections) are satisfied.
The article is placed on the good article list and added to the front page queue.
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:
Before doing anything, be sure to read the article completely, keeping a sharp eye out for mistakes.
Afterwards, compare the article to the criteria listed above, and then either support or object the article's nomination.
Please note that in order for your vote to count, you must have 50 mainspace edits.
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.
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.
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-Inquisitors are encouraged to review articles and participate in the process.
Also remember to add {{NomG}} at the top of the article you are nominating.
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
Been a while since a Good Article Nomination was initiated. Anyways, this page just got improved, it's complete, sourced, and has a lot of good and relevant pics. Plus, no dead links. --Jacques le BlancReception Area 04:51, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
Though I can't verify any information that's on it, I agree, overall the article's very clean and informative. Deserving of at least a Good status. =GuardDog 13:02, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
I think it deserves featured status, actually. --THIEF 13:20, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
I can't verify it either, but this has my badass Rayne Seal Of Approvalness because as Guard said, it's very clean, very informative, and although I think it could use some more work, that's because I'm used to working on Featured articles. :P (Thief! You Sonnuvah-Foozi! You gave me an edit conflict here. XD) -- RayneMessage 13:24, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
Clean, good looking, nice images and seems to be well written. I also vote Yay on this. Campbell430 20:51, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
Sourcing = verifying. Anyways, I can verify. I give my thumbs up for this (as I helped the article to get to what it is now... :P). -- Master Sima Yi 21:06, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
All I added to this article was that nice clean infobox pic, so not very much really! XD Anyway, I too vote Yay, informative article, linking is sufficent and images are good too. Yay all the way! --Sick-steeN 22:29, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
Well if sourcing means verifying, I can confirm the content in this article. Thought it lacked images so, added 3 more, the article is indeed informative.Vatsa 03:17, February 20, 2011 (UTC)
I just read the article, I thought it was informative, well written, and had a decent supply of images. I kind of agree with Thief, I reckon it's close to featured status as well. -- ’R BlaiddDdraig 06:10, February 20, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
First Timeline Article to be nominated for Good Status. Well-written, awesome pics, sourced, not a dead link in sight. Also short on mistakes. --Juan BlancoReception Area 11:48, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
War Clown raises his thumb as a sign of approval. --Juan BlancoReception Area 11:48, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
Well, the article is 100% complete and as you said, no dead links, mistakes and well-written.. there's nothing much more we can do to it. --THIEF 12:00, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
Though it's a rather small and rarely touched article (given it's from a spinoff), it nevertheless seems very complete and well worded. A yay from me. =GuardDog 12:06, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
I wish I had played the game so I could have a bit of background knowledge, but anyway. It's well written, has a good ammount of info, nice pictures, good quotes, ect. It's definitely a GOOD page. - ’R BlaiddDdraig 12:25, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
Having played the game myself (before my copy was ruined), I have to say that this is well-done for an Event article of a spin-off, worthy of Good status. Cheers! -- RayneMessage 12:41, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
Nice, looking, and seems to be very well written for a game that not many people pay much attention to, nice images and quotations and although is short, not much can be added to it. Campbell430 18:17, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
Nay
Comments
March 1st = vote closing day, unless someone votes nay. --THIEF 08:59, February 26, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
Believe me, I like this article a lot. But it doesn't seem right for FA status, however it does deserve "good" status. --THIEF 06:32, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
I revamped this page, that must be why you like it so much. Definite yay from me. -- 'R BlaiddDdraigWolfDragon’s Lair 07:33, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Well, I had an eye for that article a few months ago when myself and another user were putting the finishing touches on it, but it is definitely true that your revamp did improve the quality, Blaidd XD. Thanks --THIEF 07:49, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
I like this one, the wording fits, and it's detailed. The images seem a bit too large, but that might just be my personal preference. Nevertheless, it deserves the status. =GuardDog 11:23, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
There we go, gave it the ol' touch. Now it's practically FA material. (A little bit of credit goes to Braig) --Juan BlancoReception Area 14:58, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Me likey! Yay all the way through the day! --The Green LionChatterbox 09:47, March 29, 2011 (UTC)
I have to say "yay" too, even though this was a long time coming. -- RayneMessage 22:23, May 23, 2011 (UTC)
Nay
There's something about it that seems....off. Like one part of my face is "FUUUUUU--Rage guy" face, and the other is "Me Gusta" face. Yeah, no joke kids. I'll see if I can fix this up in the near future. --Juan BlancoReception Area 12:37, March 28, 2011 (UTC)3
Did a pass of rewording to make it easier to read. Otherwise, it's quite complete and well-sourced. =GuardDog 11:08, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
Nay
It's got good info, pics, sourcing, ect. But I think it needs a bit of minor rewording, some parts seemed to follow the "and then" style of writing. -- 'R BlaiddDdraigWolfDragon’s Lair 13:26, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
Comments
Hey guys, is this over yet? Its been like 2 months. One Nay, five Yays, have we come to a decision yet? Subject 12 14:45, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
An article worthy of Good status, sourced, photographed and quoted with good grammar and structures. -- RayneMessage 05:19, May 28, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
I asked the opinion of two apprentices (Elchzard and Il_ Lupo) and an admin (War Clown) and all of them suggested that this article is good. Recently updated with more sources, pictures and quotes. Animusradiation 15:09, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
I afree I have seen this page too and was suprised that it wasn't a Good or Featured article, I think it should become one. Erudito 05:17, May 28, 2011 (UTC)
Needs a personality section. Subject 12 11:27, June 19, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
This article meets all of the criteria. It has good grammar, good quality pictures, it has correct information and I reckon it deserves to be a "Good Article." TheSt0ryTeller 15 June 12:01 AM 2011
Yay
Nay
Sorry guys, im gonna have to say nay. Its a good article but it details only his life. It could really use a personality or a characteristics section. Subject 12 14:59, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
What 12 and 'R Blaidd said! ;P --☘ Sikksta ☘ ➜ ☎Talk☎ 09:51, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
What 12, Blaidd and Sikksta said. I'm going to try and read this comic soon. I'll probably try my hand at those key character article sections. --THIEF 12:58, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
I reckon it is worthy of GA status; it follows the manual of style, has more than 2 quotes, has some high quality images, it contains a personality and characteristics section, no tags and it's unbiased aswell as having good grammar. I reckon we should promote it to GA Status. TheSt0ryTeller 00:35, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
