This page lists all the nominations for Featured status. The Istruttori monitor this page and the voting process.
Featured is the highest level an article can achieve, and as such, it must meet certain requirements.
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.
…following the review process, be stable, i.e. it does not change significantly from day to day and is not the subject of ongoing edit wars. This does not apply to vandalism and protection or semi-protection as a result of vandalism.
…not be tagged with any sort of improvement tags (i.e. more sources, expand, etc).
…have a proper lead that gives a good summary of the topic and can be used for the front page featured box.
…have no more than 3 redlinks and none in the introduction, infobox, or any templates.
…have significant information from all sources and appearances, especially a biography for character articles.
…not have been previously featured on the Main Page. Otherwise, it can only be restored to featured status.
…be completely referenced for all available material and sources.
…have all quotes and images sourced.
…provide at least one quote on the article. A leading quote at the beginning of the article will be required only if there is quotable dialogue by or about the subject. Although quotes may be placed in the body of the article, a maximum of one quote is allowed at the beginning of each section.
…include a "personality and characteristics" section on all character articles.
…include a reasonable number of images of sufficient quality to illustrate the article, if said images are available.
…have a "behind the scenes" section when the info is available
…pass review by the Istruttorium review panel.
If the article meets at least 6 of the pre-requisites, the article is permitted to be held for nomination.
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 featured 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 "featured 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 "featured 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 {{NomF}} at the top of the article you are nominating.
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
Well written, high quality images (Thank you, Steen!) and has ALOT of links! Well sourced, I think it is more than deserving. But it's not up to me, it's up to YOU TO VOTE! Assassino de Roma 14:17, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
Yay from me, obviously. Same reasons stated above. Assassino de Roma 14:16, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
Yay here, as well. This article's been well done and I think it deserves Featured status. -- RayneMessage 18:33, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome Rome! But you deserve a pat on the back, you worked hard perfecting this article. And well done to anyone else who helped out on this. It's a really nice article; very informative, well written and easy on the eye. A YAY from me! --The Green LionThe Lion's Den 19:58, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
Yay, pretty complete, with all iinformation it needed to have, just some images could be upgarated and I think the descripition either, but it's pretty good anyway. SKYWALKERThe Talk 17:43, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
I approve. I've contributed an extremely large part to this article, and I want a plaque in return damn it, and also cake! --WarClownFrequency: 149.94 17:24, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
Nay
Comments
C'mon people! All we need is a few more vote to determine if it is Nay or Yay. Assassino de Roma 16:19, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
Some images could be better placed, and the "aftermath" section could do with expansion. Once that's done, I'll vote yes. --Jasca DucatoCouncil ChamberAssassination record 13:42, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
Good job. Glad this made it through. Assassino de Roma 16:58, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
From Brotherhood to Ascendance, right down to the trivia, this article is loaded with information on Cesare, and God who knows how many people have worked on this article. All the quotes are necessary, pictures fit well and HQ, informative and overall a great article. Many people worked hard on this, but it is up to you. VOTE!
Also, considering many people worked on this article, and War brought this to everyone's attention, (credit him for this please) I would like you to state in the comments below who deserves credit for this article getting FA. Assassino de Roma 14:53, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
Same reasons stated above. Assassino de Roma 18:55, May 23, 2011 (UTC)
I happen to agree with Rome. This is a rather well done page. -- RayneMessage 20:15, May 23, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
Follows the guidelines of articles, detailed and full of correct information. Properly named headings and well-chosen quotes (thanks to the awesome people from the IRC- you know who you are!) I believe this article deserves to be put up for nomination, so choose what you will, everyone!Il Lupo 15:01, July 2, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
I vote yay, 'cause of what I said up there ^Il Lupo 15:01, July 2, 2011 (UTC)
Sixth! Good article to everyone's favorite Dai. Yay! 17:19, July 2, 2011 (UTC)Assassino de Roma
I seventh the notion! Malik's article has been a long time coming. -- RayneMessage 17:29, July 2, 2011 (UTC)
Yay, yay, yay!!! The Reaper 05:05, July 3, 2011 (UTC)
I'm amazed, sweetheart. Though some of the pictures could be made bigger, excelent work -- one that this page had needed for a long time. It's a yes. -- D. Cello 05:08, July 3, 2011 (UTC)
Very detailed and complete; not to mention the quotes are particularly fitting. The wording felt off in some sections though, so I made a few adjustments, if that makes a difference for anyone. =GuardDog
Yay. It's well written and explains his character well.
Yay!Yay!Yay! The article is very specific good job! -- AED
Nay
I'm gonna have t post a strong vote against on his one. Granted, the article is fully sourced and informative and whatnot, but with the way it's written, I'd struggle to vote it for GA status. I mean, most of the subsections are ony one or two paragraphs long (in fact, "Temporary Head of the Order" consists of just one sentence). There's also some spacing issues and grammar problems. ntil these are fixed, I cannot, in good conscience, vote for this article. --Jasca DucatoCouncil ChamberAssassination record 23:53, July 3, 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Jasca. The article still needs a revamp, and I'm not going to vote for an article that I'm not comfortable with. The spacing and grammar problems don't bother me, but the incomplete and section-filled biography section does. -- Master Sima Yi 01:31, July 4, 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, seems my thoughts on the article's problems weren't just my own thing that no one else noticed. Seeing as they are obvious, and that to be honest I probably shouldn't have voted yay in the first place considering my feelings towards it, I'm changing my vote to a nay. -- 'R BlaiddDdraigWolfDragon’s Lair 02:01, July 4, 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Blaidd, Sima and Jasca. There are a few grammatical errors that need to be fixed and it may still need a revamp. So I vote Nay on this article. Read my book, got to my page :) 03:45, July 13, 2011 (UTC)
The article's very informative and clear; easy to follow even for those who didn't know anything of the character previously. =GuardDog 01:00, July 22, 2011 (UTC)
Yep. Fits all the guidelines, and is generally nice. Worthy of promotion. :) --Elchzard 15:58, July 24, 2011 (UTC)
I'll vote yay too because of it's quality. It's about to be outdated, though, with the upcoming The Chain novel. --UDITORE 16:53, July 24, 2011 (UTC)
Been here long enough. --VatsaGentek 14:20, August 31, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
This article is in very good shape. It's well written, plenty of links, HQ pictures, and good, relevant quotes. Assassino de Roma 18:01, July 31, 2011 (UTC)
Voting yay since the images have recently been sourced and I had expanded the aftermath. Uditore™ 13:43, August 16, 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I now have 50 edits so I can finally say...of course. It's an integeral part of the storyline, and since the photos are now sourced, it should be given the green light. My only question is the name...why not name it after the actual DLC, but still keep it written the way it is. thats my 2 cents. - Dop3man 80 16:27, August 17, 2011 (UTC)
It's written rather well and has nice images, fix the minor things JD mentioned and I'll vote Yay. -- 'R BlaiddDdraigWolfDragon’s Lair 04:57, August 4, 2011 (UTC)
I needed a break from my assignment, so I sourced/put the license info for all the images. All that remains is the Aftermath's expansion. :3 --Elchzard(Talking is fun)
I expanded the aftermath. Go have a look first, I'm not really awake right now and there's no one to check it. xD Uditore™ 19:45, August 12, 2011 (UTC)
I just now realized that there is a page named after the DLC about the DLC, seperate article from this one that goes in depth of the actual events, so ignore my minor comment, but still count my vote. Sorry. - Dop3man 80 20:31, August 17, 2011 (UTC)
Mass vote to remove article statuses
This is a mass vote to remove a number of articles which are marked FA, but fail to fulfill the requirements of the position. Quite honestly, I'm not sure a lot of these were even voted to the position (their votes are not in the archives). Without further ado, let's begin. --Jasca DucatoCouncil ChamberAssassination record 11:11, August 3, 2011 (UTC)
Least this one looks better than Majd Addin's. I agree with Blaidd on this, a bit of work and he's worth an GA status. --VatsaGentek 06:10, August 4, 2011 (UTC)
Might make a GA. --VatsaGentek 14:20, August 31, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
This page has caught my eye a few times and only recently did I notice it was a featured article. Most of it is written in continuous and even if changed, its not a very exensive article. Subject 12Talk to me 05:59, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
I could tell from the first few paragraphs that it wasn't worthy of FA. I don't think it should be merged with Search for the Apple either. -- 'R BlaiddDdraigThe Swamp 07:30, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
A GA perhaps. --VatsaGentek 10:16, August 29, 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Vatsa...a GA perhaps, but lacking to be an FA. - DOPE, and just shut up 00:09, August 31, 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. It has potential, but not quite enough for the status. =GuardDog 13:18, August 31, 2011 (UTC)
Keep
Comments
In my opinion, I'd say that it would be better if Attack on Masyaf was merged along with Search for the Apple, because the attack happens as a result of Altair retrieving it. Slate Orchid 18:41, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, it happened because of it, but it's still two different things. Uditore™ 19:38, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
A very talented person. --VatsaGentek 14:20, August 31, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
Sourced text and images. Added information. Tried to keep it to all the stated requirements. Ideas for further improvement are welcomed though, hopefully, not necessary. Uditore™ 11:02, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
As revamper and nominator. Uditore™ 11:02, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
It is well written and would make a good featured article. It has every detail about him that people might want to know. I hope it will become one. AED 13:22, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
Well written, good images, sourced where needed and very pleasant to read. Good job Udi. I vote yay. Amnesty 13:24, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
I don't need to say anything more than what is said above. Yay for me. -- Master Sima Yi 18:26, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
This article was FA, but was removed because Jasca Ducato and some other users didn't consider it good enough, so it was removed as FA. I done some minor rewording, added a better quote, and so on. It made it to FA before with great pictures, good quotes and well written information. It is worthy of FA. It deserves it. RomehSpeak now 18:19, September 24, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
Same reasons above. RomehSpeak now 18:19, September 24, 2011 (UTC)
I touched the article up a bit (adding some necessary links, etc.) and now I agree with Rome, it deserves FA. Let's hope it receives it. NostalgiaAC 22:04, September 30, 2011 (UTC)
It can pass for FA. I would've preferred to have more information and pictures on the historical event, but that's not going to happen. -- Master Sima Yi 16:09, October 12, 2011 (UTC)
Removed a few redundant links and reworded very slightly, but otherwise, it looks fine. No complaints from me. =GuardDog 06:34, October 28, 2011 (UTC)
I talked to Rome about the "Aftermath" section and he explained about it. The information is there, the quotes are good and it covers the event well. It's a Yay from this St0ryTeller. --TellerWords, On my Screen :O 16:39, November 7, 2011 (UTC)
Alright, so it's been a long time since this page was put up for nomination, and I now believe that it is ready. A fantastic read with proper quotes, and images, it's now a very different article from the one that got removed as FA. Subject 12Talk to me 18:32, November 9, 2011 (UTC)
Nay
Hmm, well its very close to FA, it has everything an FA would need; information, images, sourcing, infobox, proper formatting, nice headers and of course well written, etc. But it doesn't seem to "flow" like an FA should. Its as if all the FA requirements have been gathered into a messy pile. It may just be me though, it is so close and deserves more than GA, but not quite FA. -- 'R BlaiddDdraigEnter... THE SCARY DOOR 05:26, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
^What he said. I don't know, it just doesn't mesh like an FA should. --JackWallsinFamous 13:55, October 18, 2011 (UTC)
The article had its FA status removed because it failed to fulfil the requirements for an FA article. This has not changed. Also, this "someone" you're referring to, which we both know is me, was not the only person to think this way, hence why the article was voted down. So quit it with the sly comments. --Jasca DucatoCouncil ChamberAssassination record 17:23, October 30, 2011 (UTC)
I didn't refer to you directly because I had a feeling you would get defensive over that, in some way. RomehSpeak now 21:20, October 30, 2011 (UTC)
Two higher ups and 2 staff votes -- enough to close it up. -- D. Cello 23:18, October 11, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
Contains all known information, has a lot of good pictures and quotes. Everything is well-written and understandable. I don't think it would be wise to wait for Assassin's Creed: The Chain, since that will be released in 2012 and will most likely take several months to be completely released. Anyways, as it is now, I think this is worthy of FA status.
Yay
As nominator. -- Master Sima Yi 17:42, October 11, 2011 (UTC)
Enough staff votes to pass for FA. -- Master Sima Yi 10:49, October 13, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
Sorry for the continuous FA nominations; I'm trying to get the main characters from the past games and other media to be of the best quality before Revelations is released, as we are going to get a lot of curious visitors then. Anyways, the article contains all known information, good quotes and pictures, like the others. -- Master Sima Yi 21:39, October 12, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
As nominator. -- Master Sima Yi 21:39, October 12, 2011 (UTC)
There is bit of information about Machiavelli that is missing. It skips right from Cesare's downfall to Valencia. No section on what he and Ezio inbetween those two events. Nay from me. RomehSpeak now 19:23, October 19, 2011 (UTC)
Comments
@Rome: I have added the missing info (Search for Cesare/Chasing Micheletto) NestyWanna talk? 20:12, October 19, 2011 (UTC)
I have to say Nay, as I found several sections of this article which had either very little information or needed expansion. There are also a few links that don't lead anywhere. Il Lupo 10:35, October 28, 2011 (UTC)
Are you people serious? I found 23 spelling errors... but besides that I also think it could be worded much better. -- 'R BlaiddDdraigEnter... THE SCARY DOOR 00:20, October 29, 2011 (UTC)
I happen to agree with both of you, links need fixing, spelling mistakes and some parts of the article that could be better, so it is a Nay from me, if these things could be improved then yes, I'd vote yay. TellerWords, On my Screen :O 00:27, October 29, 2011 (UTC)
Comments
I have removed all double links, fixed the ones that led to a re-direct, etc. etc. I will look at the spelling errors and rewording after I've had breakfast. NestyWanna talk? 08:12, October 29, 2011 (UTC)
It's lacking in behind the scenes details. I mean, the history section is extremely detailed, if messy, but a two paragraph ideologies section? Nowhere near enough IMO. --Jasca DucatoCouncil ChamberAssassination record 17:27, October 30, 2011 (UTC)
@BlaiddDdraig: YES I AM SERIOUS. Why couldn't you have fucking fixed those TWENTY-THREE spelling errors while you were at it, instead of counting them, then mentioning it here so that someone else goes to fix them?! I've been working on that since last June, twenty-three spelling errors compared to the length of that article, is not something that had my utmost attention, strangely. -- Master Sima Yi 20:32, October 30, 2011 (UTC)
@Sima: Check my fucking edit to the page. I DID FIX those 23 spelling errors. And you nominated it for FA, you should have checked for those errors before doing so. You of all people should understand how perfect these articles have to be, and 23 errors is appalling, no matter how much of a small detail they are. So don't lose your fucking head and go off at me just because I told you my honest opinion. -- 'R BlaiddDdraigEnter... THE SCARY DOOR 06:24, October 31, 2011 (UTC)
I did not notice those errors, otherwise I would have fixed them. As if I purposely left them erroneous. Go get a nicer tone if you want to criticize someone's work. -- Master Sima Yi 06:31, October 31, 2011 (UTC)
Settled now, slight misunderstanding. For anyone who's curious, I wasn't criticising his work, I was just shocked and disappointed in all the Yay voters. -- 'R BlaiddDdraigEnter... THE SCARY DOOR 06:58, October 31, 2011 (UTC)
Shocked and disappointed in the Yay voters? Honestly, Blaidd. RomehSpeak now 15:23, October 31, 2011 (UTC)
Yes, honestly. You voted Yay for an article with 23 spelling errors. I can understand missing a few, but 23 is outrageous and should've been spotted well before me. Of course I was surprised. Now if anyone else wishes to have a go at me, I'd prefer it be done over the IRC so I can stop commenting here. -- 'R BlaiddDdraigEnter... THE SCARY DOOR 06:58, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
too many pictures in there just for the sake of pictures, and the Personality and Charateristics "section" is negligible at best. --Jasca DucatoCouncil ChamberAssassination record 17:30, October 30, 2011 (UTC)
Sufficient staff votes to pass. --Vatsa (talk • Gentek) 02:50, November 4, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
All necessary info, enough useful pictures, fitting quotes. Should be worthy enough. -- Master Sima Yi 14:49, October 27, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
As nominator. -- Master Sima Yi 14:49, October 27, 2011 (UTC)
I approve this message. -- Elchzard 14:58, October 27, 2011 (UTC)
All necessary info, enough useful pictures, fitting quotes. Should be worthy enough. -- D. Cello 15:37, October 27, 2011 (UTC)
Thanks doll, XD Revamped that a while ago, probably improved by then but still, I believe it's worthy. TellerWords, On my Screen :O 06:02, October 28, 2011 (UTC)
Sure, why not? Could be improved with a more detailed personality section, though still seems acceptable as is. =GuardDog 06:34, October 28, 2011 (UTC)
I have changed from a Yay to a Nay because, as Blaidd said, it needs work in terms of wording. I can also see it needs a lot of links added, too. Nostalgia ACLet's talk 00:45, October 29, 2011 (UTC)
Comments
I will vote once SubtlePen has revamped the personality section. NestyWanna talk? 15:44, October 27, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, I'll also wait till the personality section is cleaned up and expanded. Subject 12Talk to me 11:00, October 28, 2011 (UTC)
Enough yays, no nays. As Jasca pointed, you can expand the Aftermath section -- but a great article regardless. (but seriously, expand it XD ) -- D. Cello 20:53, November 3, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
I've revamped this page, asked Nos and 12 on how could it be improved, helped me out. It has necessary information, quotes, spelling, grammar and pictures which is suiting to the article. I believe it's worthy but that's for you all to decide. --TellerWords, On my Screen :O 05:03, October 31, 2011 (UTC)
Very well written with great quotes and images, it's a Yay. Nostalgia ACLet's talk 11:02, October 31, 2011 (UTC)
I done a minor bit of work, so it looks better now. It's worthy of FA. Yay. RomehSpeak now 15:51, October 31, 2011 (UTC)
Has detailed information, images are nice; I don't see any grammatical errors. Has my vote. -- KaishiroMessage 23:25, October 31, 2011 (UTC)
First time I saw it I tought Phil had worked on it. -- D. Cello 23:47, October 31, 2011 (UTC)
Had to do a fair bit of work on some grammar, but it's well-written and certain sections look good enough to be found in a real history textbook. Well done, TST, you make the rest of the Apprentices proud ;) Il Lupo 01:33, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
Good images, wording's sound and the information seems complete. =GuardDog 04:53, November 1, 2011 (UTC)
If this article gets to FA, the credit goes to Teller, for the revamp, and Vatsa, for providing some great high quality images. RomehSpeak now 16:15, October 31, 2011 (UTC)
So, I've revamped most of the page, removed some real world references and put the plot together in a single section. Also sorted out some of the pics, used the others to brighten up the plot, and also got rid of some WP dead links on the cast listing. Did the best I could on the page, and have also asked around about it's caliber. I think it's time for a vote so...here it is. --JackWallsinFamous 08:51, November 14, 2011 (UTC)
A good read, gentle people of Wiki, risked spoilers but it was worth it, just to read this article. Yay. TellerWords, On my Screen :O 09:17, November 14, 2011 (UTC)
Good work there, War. NestyWanna talk? 18:20, November 14, 2011 (UTC)
Has my vote, nice work War, it's a good, in-depth read. Nostalgia ACLet's talk 06:19, November 20, 2011 (UTC)
