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.
A lot of good information -- FIKUS96 15:40, January 26, 2010 (UTC)
Yay
Maybe just reduce those artifacts picture from MyCheats, they're too big. -- D. Cello 15:31, January 26, 2010 (UTC)
Nay
It's just too long plus, it really seems crammed. It has lots of red, non-working links not to mention the debatable "allegiance" system [(A), (T), (!)] as well as redundancy. Silver Mage 11:57, January 28, 2010 (UTC)
@D. Cello: And "My Cheat" should be cutted out from the image...--PhantomT1412 20:44, January 28, 2010 (UTC)
that page is rather messy~ - SilverSummonerTaLk 21:24, January 28, 2010 (UTC)\
Agreed with everything above. The page just looks like an awful mess. It needs some serious reformatting first. -- Reqυiem 23:31, February 1, 2010 (UTC)
Too disorganized, as said above. -- Master Sima Yi 16:28, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
It's kind of messy, and she is a critical character. Unless some serious revamp occurs, her article shall be demoted. -- D. Cello 20:17, February 10, 2010 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
Article has been rewritten, updated, lists are cleaned up, and irrelevant information has been moved/deleted. -- Reqυiem 18:33, February 13, 2010 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
Existing correct information has been reworded to be more cohesive, information has been corrected, new sections with relevant information added.AgentValentine 22:27, February 13, 2010 (UTC)
Needs better formatting and more pictures (or at least better arrangement). -- D. Cello 22:46, February 13, 2010 (UTC)~ - pictures rearranged, formatting improved, changing vote
Like he said needs more pictures. ^_^ Spoonodeath 00:09, February 14, 2010 (UTC)-Like the wikipedia link added.
Insert reason for objection hereMasterAssassin217, 19:15, February 18, 2010
--You might want to re-read the article, War. Apparently someone (who shall not be named) had moved the article to add in Nikolai's middle name, and when said move was reverted, the whole database was deleted and Sima had to rewrite the article using a much OLDER version of the article as a base. Most of our users (I've seen Jasca, 16 and a few others help) had to bring back the article to its former status.. so, for a TL:DR.. the article is different now. :P --THIEF 21:19, February 21, 2011 (UTC)
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)
Trying again in future. --THIEF 05:22, March 29, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
You know the gist. Fully complete, images, worded well to a satisfactory extent. Not "Featured status" because something I can't put my finger on is making the article seem not good enough for it, and simply because the writing of that particular game isn't that good. :D --THIEF 06:32, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
Nay
Yeah...no. No source, kinda off paragraphing, lacking one good pic, and the infobox pic is...uhhh oO (Yeah, my first time saying Nay. Hooray for me!) --Juan BlancoReception Area 12:32, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough, the pictures are the best we can get for that game (though it does look like Ezio is doing something dirty there, XD). Someone once told me that Major Event articles didn't need sourcing, guess that person was wrong (figures). Oh well. --THIEF 21:04, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Second Nomination
Now renamed Corombo in Venice, I've done a full-blown revamp to the page, starting with the format, pictures, quotes, links. Also sourced, made minor tweaks to the infobox content, and of course, rewrote the info. Let's hope that this time the page will nail it, aye? --WarClownFrequency: 149.94 13:39, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
Informative, sourced and great images. Good job. Vatsa 15:09, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
Might do a pass of minor rewording, but still, I really like it. Very informative, considering I never played Discovery, and the images are all relevant and useful. Definitely yay. =GuardDog 23:20, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
You know the gist. Fully complete, high quality images, well written and linked. Formatting and lack of confidence in this article keeps it from Featured status. XD --THIEF 06:32, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
Just read the page, and I really liked it, it was just written so well. It was an all round good read. This page can get its "Good" on. -- 'R BlaiddDdraigWolfDragon’s Lair 08:08, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Well-written and complete. The images are fitting too, though if I remember right, that first image wasn't during the siege of Masyaf, but during the retaking XD Still, it fits. A yay from me. =GuardDog 11:23, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Pretty good article, informative and overall well written. Needs a little bit of work to reach FA but it deserves to be listed as a Good Article. Subject 12 12:00, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
There we go, gave it the awesome War Clown treatment. Big credit goes to Vatsa for the quotes and late night pics. The page was messy as hell and had a lot lacking at first, now this is practically FA material :) --Juan BlancoReception Area 17:23, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Lol, It wasn't messy as hell. XD --THIEF 21:02, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Lacks a few good quotes, and unsourced. Also lacks a few links on some areas of some of the paragraphs. Wow, I haven't voted for "Yay" on any of these nominations. Hah. Not funny. --Juan BlancoReception Area 12:40, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Everyone else thought it was good, glad you changed your mind and fixed what you had "problems" with. Remember that these are "Good" articles, not "Featured". You darn perfectionist! :P --THIEF 05:20, March 29, 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)
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
This article is one of my most loved ones. XD. It has its faults, the intro may need to be reworded and shortened, but overall it is very informative and describes the swordplay and available tactics in these games to a great detail. --THIEF 06:32, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
Yay
Huh, I've never seen this article before - quite a shame, since it's quite extensive and detailed. As you said, it could use some polishing, but it's still pretty complete. =GuardDog 11:23, March 28, 2011 (UTC)
You have great taste Thief, cause this page is quite special in it's own right, though I find that they're are some things that can be organized in a better way, it's still great as it is. DanMan7308 21:11, March 28, 2011 (UTC) DanMan7308
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)
