…be sourced with all available references and appearances.
…follow the Manual of Style, Layout Guide, and all other wiki policies.
…not be tagged with any sort of improvement tags.
…have a proper lead, with a undetailed résumé 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.
…pass review by the Bureau review panel.
If the article meets at least 5 of the prerequisites, the article is permitted to be held for nomination.
How to nominate:
First, nominate an article you find is worthy of Good status, putting it at the bottom of the list below.
Others will object to the nomination if they disagree that the article is not 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 categorized as such.
Also, if, at least a week after the article's nomination, that article has 3 Bureau 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 at least 50 mainspace edits.
If you object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved.
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 at least three supporting Bureau 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." Non-Bureau members are also encouraged to review articles and participate in the process.
Also remember to add {{NomG}} at the top of the article you are nominating.
Page has been revamped and will go up for FA. Has been agreed on by Teller and me. NestyContact me! 15:44, February 1, 2012 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
I had just looked over this Assassin's article which does not follow 2 of the requirements which are an important aspect to this wiki. It has been tagged with an improvement template which is the Revamp template which means is does not comply with the ACWiki manual of style. As said before, one of the most important aspects of the Wiki. I'm sure you would Nay it if it was just put up for voting and it had this template so I do not see why not if it's already GA status. The template was added by War himself. If you disagree feel free to disagree.
It was pretty good when it was smaller. The sheer amount of information makes it pretty high-maintenance though, and the latter parts especially could use some work. =GuardDog 12:22, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
I have to say Nay for the removal. The article only has a good status and it's a mess due to Revelations information which wasn't formatted properly by the users who added. As I see it, it can be improved and promoted to featured, but does not require removal of it's current status.. --Vatsa (talk • Gentek) 12:41, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
Though it can be fixed, the Revelations plot was a large part of Ezio's story, it also includes the addition of Embers aswell as dead links and quotes that could've added. --TellerWords, On my Screen :O 12:43, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
If no one else beats me to it, I will revamp the page today and tomorrow. I'll leave a message here when I (or someone else) is done, and we can check it over again. It's been way too long since I did something useful here anyway.. NestyContact me! 13:56, January 25, 2012 (UTC)
Should probably have said this somewhat sooner, but adding some relevant quotes to the sections might make the article of a higher standard. NestyContact me! 07:02, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
I gave it a once over, fixed some mistakes and altered some sentences, and now I'm leaving my vote here. :) Slate Vesper 10:26, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
Very informative, an easy read and an enjoyable read. Good job Odranoelluta! -- ► Kaloneous ◄ ♣HelpDesk♣ 12:52, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
Has the required votes now that Sima has removed his Nay, and it's been a week. --NOSTALGIATALK 05:10, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
I recently did a complete revamp of the article and expanded his biography and added more images and a brief trivia section. In addition, I reworded the article and made it sound more coherent. It could still use some more images, but I had Nesty and Slate look over it and they agreed with me that it's GA. --NOSTALGIATALK 20:39, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
Just an additional confirmation (though I suppose this should more be posed at Kal) is the concept art really of Putnam? I recall that image being on the DLC code for the Benedict Arnold missions. =GuardDog 00:56, January 14, 2013 (UTC)
I wondered that myself. I have tried to confirm it but various other non-official sources listed him as Putnam. I haven't seen any Ubisoft sources confirming of refuting it though. :/ sorry. ► Kaloneous ◄ ♣HelpDesk♣ 03:55, January 14, 2013 (UTC)
Then it might be better to remove it, just to be on the safe side. NestyContact me! 06:27, January 14, 2013 (UTC)
Yes, it is indeed on the DLC code for the Benedict Arnold DLC. -- Master Sima YiTalk 08:32, January 14, 2013 (UTC)
Sima, I addressed the issues you mentioned, please look it over whenever you have time, and reconsider your vote. NestyContact me! 09:17, January 14, 2013 (UTC)
Looks better, but still misses all background info from his database; only his direct involvement in the game is included right now. -- Master Sima YiTalk 09:06, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
Nice addition to the GA category. --NOSTALGIATALK 04:31, March 25, 2013 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
As writer of nearly all of the information from in-game content, as well as a good other bit of the page, I feel that now it's ready. The information from Forsaken is there, and several images have been placed. I'm not entirely sure, but I think it could almost be FA as well with slightly more work. EmeraldCorruption (talk) 01:52, March 13, 2013 (UTC)
I like it, a great read, very informative and retains the impact of this character and his influence on the game (and series). ► Kaloneous ◄ ♣HelpDesk♣ 04:57, March 13, 2013 (UTC)
Did somebody say... taco hat? Jokes aside, it meets the criteria for GA, but not FA. Thumbs up from moi. ~ GI AuditoreComms Channel 07:21, March 13, 2013 (UTC)
I might eventually get round to making this FA. Until then, good job. NestyContact me! 08:38, March 13, 2013 (UTC)
Looks good, very thorough. Could use some more images, however.--NOSTALGIATALK 23:02, March 16, 2013 (UTC)
If I see "taco hat" like that ever again... I'll get George Bush to shoot me. But, until then, I think this article: bien.--Crimson KnightIntercom 23:09, March 16, 2013 (UTC)
Crimson, you're such a hypocrite...considering your profile picture. On topic, it has my vote. Stormbeast♉The Helpful Place 01:50, March 17, 2013 (UTC)
Add some images to the Battle and/or Aftermath sections and to the Gallery as well. Other than that, it looks good. --NOSTALGIATALK 03:45, March 17, 2013 (UTC)
Images have been added. Please take another look :) ~ GI AuditoreComms Channel 07:22, March 17, 2013 (UTC)
Battle and event templates need to be overhauled. -- Master Sima YiTalk 09:31, March 17, 2013 (UTC)
Vote closed Click [show] to view the votes and comments.
Hey... I was strolling around his page and I found out it was good to read. Has sufficient photos, nice wording, references, etc. I think it is ready for the GA status. -- AgentG231 (talk) 01:39, April 1, 2014 (UTC)
As I already stated in the comments, it needs quite a bit of work. There are still a number of redlinks in the article, the lead quote isn't very inspired, images are lacking and not always very well placed, to just name a few things. Sorry, but for now, it's a no. NestyContact me! 12:08, April 1, 2014 (UTC)
Personally, I'd prefer a little more work be done to the article so it can become Featured, rather than Good. NestyContact me! 08:18, April 1, 2014 (UTC)
I'm actually of the same mind as Nesty; while Adéwalé's article is alright right now, I think there's still more than can be done. The sourcing for example, is all over the place. There's not a reference in sight when it comes to Black Flag, which is something that really should be fixed, in my opinion. Pictures that are in the gallery when they could be used to illustrate the main body are also an issue. We don't have screenshots of Freedom Cry either. I think the article as a whole still needs more work and might not even be eligible for "Good" status (but then, I have not participated in these before, so I don't quite know where the bar is for that status) at the moment.CrookThe Constantine District 08:34, April 1, 2014 (UTC)
