Difference between revisions of "Wikisimpsons:Comprehensive article nominations"

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4

Contents 1 What is a comprehensive article? 2 Criteria 3 Nominating process 4 Nominations 4.1 Moog 4.1.1 Support (2) 4.1.2 Neutral (1) 4.1.3 Oppose (0) 4.1.4 Comments 4.2 Wendell Borton 4.2.1 Support (0) 4.2.2 Neutral (0) 4.2.3 Oppose (0) 4.2.4 Comments 4.3 Andy Hamilton 4.3.1 Support (0) 4.3.2 Neutral (0) 4.3.3 Oppose (0) 4.3.4 Comments 4.4 Guy Incognito (character) 4.4.1 Support (2) 4.4.2 Neutral (0) 4.4.3 Oppose (0) 4.4.4 Comments 4.5 Parker Peterman 4.5.1 Support (0) 4.5.2 Neutral (0) 4.5.3 Oppose (0) 4.5.4 Comments

This page is to nominate minor articles as being complete, or comprehensive articles.

What is a comprehensive article?

A comprehensive article is one that is complete with all its relevant information, but due to its slight size, cannot obtain Featured article status (our best work). The purpose of this project is to establish uniformity among Wikisimpsons, by seeing that all articles are, essentially, complete, with all their relevant material. Through this process, we mainly hope to let readers know when an article they are reading is complete, and not a "stub" (an article which has been denoted as lacking in information), though its size might suggest so. Episodes and regular and supporting characters cannot qualify as comprehensive articles, as they can obtain featured status. (For nominating these articles, see Wikisimpsons:Featured article.)

Criteria

An article must…

1. …be well-written.
2. …list all canon and non-canon appearances.
3. …follow the Manual of Style and all other policies on Wikisimpsons.
4. …not be tagged with any improvement tags (i.e. image needed, stub, etc).
5. …have all canon (or non-canon if this is all there is) information presented.
6. …be completely referenced.
7. …have all image licenses fully filled-out.
8. …provide at least one relevant quote on the article if available.
9. …include a "Behind the Laughter" section for real world information (if any).

Nominating process

How to nominate:

1. First, nominate an article you find is worthy of comprehensive status, putting it at the bottom of the list below; see criteria above.
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. If at the start of a month the article is the one with most support votes (and least oppose votes) it will be officially known as a "Comprehensive 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.
   1. If you object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved.
3. 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.
4. Once all objectors' complaints have been solved (and the article has more support votes than any other nominated article), the article will be officially known as a "comprehensive article", and the {{comp}} template can be added to the top of its page.
5. All nominations must be put at the bottom of the page.

Note: Remember to sign your posts (~~~~).

Nominations

Moog

It may fit as comprehensive article for October. / Loco87 ^{(TALK / Contribs)} 10:20, September 30, 2015 (EDT)

Support (2)

1. Save it for October, but I think it's fine. The Solar Dragon 13:44, June 28, 2017 (EDT)
2. Looks good. Concur with saving it for October. -- Mythigator (talk) 23:46, July 6, 2017 (EDT)

Neutral (1)

1. It needs a Behind the Laughter section, but other than that it looks ok. --Nick97 ^{(talk ~ contribs)} 16:56, September 30, 2015 (EDT)

Oppose (0)

Comments

• Added a BtL section. -- Mythigator (talk) 00:44, October 7, 2015 (EDT)

Wendell Borton

It could fit as comprehensive article. / Loco87 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 11:40, May 23, 2017 (EDT)

Support (0)

Neutral (0)

Oppose (0)

Comments

Andy Hamilton

Feels like a complete article to me. The Solar Dragon 13:41, June 28, 2017 (EDT)

Support (0)

Neutral (0)

Oppose (0)

Comments

Guy Incognito (character)

Seems like a decent and complete article. The Solar Dragon 16:14, July 13, 2017 (EDT)

Support (2)

1. Seems decent and complete to me. / Loco87 ^{(TALK / Contribs)} 09:00, July 14, 2017 (EDT)
2. It looks good. I know that more than one person has been working on it, so it also represents a true collaborative effort. -- Mythigator (talk) 22:02, July 27, 2017 (EDT)

Neutral (0)

Oppose (0)

Comments

• Were you nominating the article for Guy Incognito the character or the crew member? The link goes to the crew member. -- Mythigator (talk) 21:56, July 13, 2017 (EDT)

Parker Peterman

Pretty pleased with how this article turned out. The Solar Dragon 18:05, July 27, 2017 (EDT)

Support (0)

Neutral (0)

Oppose (0)

Comments