Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Addition log/2019

Final Fantasy XII (2nd supplementary nomination)

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Final Fantasy XII for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

Fran (Final Fantasy)

Final Fantasy XII

9 articles

Final Fantasy XII: Revenant Wings

Fortress

Last month, Abryn wrote an article on a third Final Fantasy XII character, Fran, and got it to GA by the end of September. As such, it needs to be added to the existing FFXII topic, so here it is! --Pres N 01:57, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support: seems like a straightforward addition. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 04:24, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. A well-written article, and a logical addition. – Rhain ☔ 03:02, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per the above discussion. Aoba47 (talk) 19:15, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above, seems like a straight-forward addition to the topic.--Alexandra IDV^talk 17:31, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Closed with consensus to add Fran (Final Fantasy) to topic. GamerPro64 19:27, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NWA World Historic Light Heavyweight Championship (1st supplementary nomination)

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/NWA World Historic Light Heavyweight Championship for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

Stuka Jr.

NWA World Historic Light Heavyweight Championship

6 articles

Getting the process going as Stuka Jr. became a Good Article on 14 September. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:30, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Seems like a straightforward addition of the new title holder. ~~Stuka Jr. needs to be added to the topic box, and when you do I'd recommend putting the articles into some sort of order (they don't currently appear to be either alphabetical or chronological?).~~ Actually, I've decided to just fix it. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 00:42, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per Bryan Rutherford.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:53, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support simple addition. Kees08 (Talk) 03:46, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with consensus to add Stuka Jr. to the topic - GamerPro64 21:55, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NWA World Historic Middleweight Champions (1st supplementary nomination)

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/NWA World Historic Middleweight Champions for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

Carístico

NWA World Historic Middleweight Champions

8 articles

Getting the process going as Carístico became a Good Article on 3 May. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:30, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Looks like the newest member of the set, at GA quality. I've gone ahead and added the new article to the topic box. As a suggestion, I would arrange the wrestlers chronologically, rather than alphabetically, but others may prefer it as-is. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 13:23, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - all looks good to me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support − up to GA quality. --Kyle Peake (talk) 21:10, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with consensus to add Carístico to the topic. - GamerPro64 02:08, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Arabian Peninsula tropical cyclones (1st supplementary nomination)

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Arabian Peninsula tropical cyclones for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

Three storms affected the Arabian Peninsula last year, and they have all been promoted to GA status. I believe all existing articles still are at GA standards. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:58, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Looks like a valid update, and the reasoning from the previous promotion still holds. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 16:36, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --►Cekli 829 18:20, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Meets requirements. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 05:09, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with consensus to add Cyclone Sagar, Cyclone Mekunu and Cyclone Luban to the topic. --十八 20:40, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel Cinematic Universe films (4th supplementary nomination)

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Marvel Cinematic Universe films for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

Remove

Accolades received by The Avengers

This supplementary discussion is to add all of the 2018 MCU film releases, which have all been made GAs. It is also to remove the "List of accolades received by The Avengers (2012 film)", as it is felt be the active editors of these articles that, as we continue to add new film releases, an "accolades" articles is not really in the scope of this topic. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Everything looks good to me. - Brojam (talk) 05:58, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't see any issues. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:36, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - Black Panther has been delisted. Argento Surfer (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support has the quality, is part of the topic and hits all the marks. MPJ-DK (talk) 02:39, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support the additions and the removal, which clarifies the scope. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 15:17, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The "Marvel Cinematic Universe film actors" article seems a little bit out of place.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:14, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It applies to all of the included individual film articles, and is mostly a subpage of the main List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films age which follows WP:SUMMARY for it, just as it does for the film articles. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:32, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now Can we not talk about this until the current copyvio concerns have been cleaned up? One of the main contributors to these articles is currently at CCI (and I've just been informed that CCI typically requires at least five examples, so I'm gonna go make sure it does that) and Black Panther (film) is currently tagged as having a large amount of close paraphrasing -- it's only one section, but that's because most of the rest of the article is a WP:QUOTEFARM. I see no reason to believe the rest of these articles aren't similar, since I picked Black Panther because (a) that's where a single instance of blatant copyvio recently occurred (I reverted it and got an admin to revdel) and (b) I really like that movie: neither of these are particularly "unique", and the editor in question is an established, respectable one, so we have no reason to assume that edits like the revdelled one haven't slipped through the cracks in the other articles. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 21:50, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- It should be noted that Black Panther (film) went through a lengthy review process where the amount of quotes was addressed before being passed. As stated on the articles' talk page, Earwig’s COPYVIO detector only returns two sources with an elevated risk of COPYVIO. The most significant is a Wikipedia mirror site (warning: do not visit that site, it redirects to unsafe spam) and the other contains a lengthy blockquote. The rest are within the acceptable range of tolerance. Hijiri appears to be operating from a zero tolerance stance whereas WP:CLOSEPHRASING says "limited close paraphrasing is appropriate".--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:15, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Hijiri88: Do you still oppose the nomination? GamerPro64 03:31, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - FYI, most of the concerns that Hijiri raised on the article’s talk page have been addressed, hopefully to his satisfaction.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 05:00, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note that FYI, most of the concerns that Hijiri raised on the article’s talk page have been addressed, hopefully to his satisfaction. is the same kind of IDHT "I've fixed the problems you painstakingly demonstrated to be problems after arbitrarily picking out a single block of text -- are you happy?" that happens quite frequently in these kinds of GAN/GAR/FAC/FLC/FTC/ETC discussions; another quick glance at the article the other day revealed more such problems. See below. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:09, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do still oppose. I proposed a solution to the whole copyvio mess on Adamstom's talk page (essentially boiling down to "Adam and TT help clean up the mess, and I don't talk about it"), and he spat in my face. I see no evidence that the Black Panther article has been thoroughly swept of plagiarism, let alone the other couple-dozen articles involved. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 06:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. The way I see it I will be closing this Supp nom as Promoted due to all these articles being Good Articles. If people do not think that any of these articles deserve to be GA, they should take it for a Good Article Reassessment and have others decide. Until then this discussion is done with until the next Supp nom. GamerPro64 19:25, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@GamerPro64: It's simply unacceptable for you (or any closer) to overlook the massive textual plagiarism problem in these articles now that they have been brought up. GAR is a painful, frustrating process, and any nominator willing to take any -- or, god help them, all -- of these pages to GAR and subject themselves to that kind of grief would be recognized as a hero of Wikipedia. But it shouldn't be a prerequisite to not having a series of pages classified as "featured" when they clearly violate several of our core content policies that someone has to perform the tremendous feat of self-sacrifice of opening some or all of those GARs. The Black Panther GAN last year ignored the copyright problems, which is enough to automatically invalidate it (even ignoring the fact that the reviewer was clearly a troll, and probably also a sockpuppet); in an ideal world you or I or anyone else could simply choose to delist GAs that had invalid reviews, but that's not how the system works at the moment, so we have to accommodate for that by not making the damage worse. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 01:59, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support I cleary see no issues and it looks good. Sheldybett (talk) 11:51, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Struck !vote by user who was subsequently banned for socking. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 09:06, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note regarding copyvio This problem keeps getting worse the more one digs: Ant-Man and the Wasp, Black Panther, Spider-Man: Homecoming. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:09, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1st Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) (1st supplementary nomination)

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/1st Army Group (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

1st Army Group, Kingdom of Yugoslavia

10 articles

4th Army

27th Infantry Division Savska

40th Infantry Division Slavonska

42nd Infantry Division Murska

7th Army

32nd Infantry Division Triglavski

38th Infantry Division Dravska

1st Cavalry Division

Milorad Petrović

When I originally successfully nominated this topic, I considered that the subordinate divisions of each army may not have enough coverage to be independently notable. The inclusion of the commander was in fact suggested when this was considered as a good topic two-and-a-half years ago, but I discounted it because there really was no similar GT to compare to. I've subsequently re-considered this position and created the division articles and one for Milorad Petrović, who commanded the army group during its brief existence. All five subordinate division articles have now been promoted to GA, and Petrović was just promoted to GA. I believe that this topic will be comprehensive once these articles have been added, and don't foresee any further expansion, as the only subordinate formations that don't have articles were ad hoc brigade-sized ones with only a brief existence that don't have sufficient coverage in sources to be notable. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:54, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support the additions fall in with the topic, are all GAs and make sense. MPJ-DK (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - looks good to me. Parsecboy (talk) 19:22, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - nice work and expansion on the original topic. Kees08 (Talk) 19:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with consensus to add 27th Infantry Division Savska, 32nd Infantry Division Triglavski, 38th Infantry Division Dravska, 40th Infantry Division Slavonska, 42nd Infantry Division Murska and Milorad Petrović to the topic.--十八 23:37, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Off-season Atlantic hurricanes (4th supplementary nomination)

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Off-season Atlantic hurricanes for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

Tropical Storm Alberto (2018)

I'm nominating an addition to this good topic, now that the recent Tropical Storm Alberto (2018) has become a GA. i believe the rest of the topic is still up to the standards of meeting the good article criteria. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:44, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question - looking at the list presented in List of off-season Atlantic hurricanes I see a lot of entries where the hurricane mentioned is a section in an overall article on the season - and a lot of those are not GA articles, is that acceptable under the "no cherry picking" rule? I've never seen this in any nomination I've looked at before or is that rule specifically for full articles only? MPJ-DK (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It hadn't been an issue before. The "no cherry picking" rule refers to the individual articles. It's important to note that the topic is "Off-season Atlantic hurricanes", not "Seasons that have an off-season Atlantic hurricane". If it was the latter, then I would be inclined to include the season articles. As it stands, the focus is on the off-season storms, which are listed individually in the list article, along with every single storm that can support an article. The remainder are entities in the season section. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well then Support from me. MPJ-DK (talk) 02:36, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support addition. Article in good shape. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 15:57, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with consensus to add Tropical Storm Alberto (2018) to the topic.--十八 23:20, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Current Consejo Mundial de Lucha Libre championships (1st supplementary nomination)

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Current Consejo Mundial de Lucha Libre championships for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

Mexican National Heavyweight Championship

Current Consejo Mundial de Lucha Libre championships

27 articles

The article has been a Featured List since 2009, but was not used by CMLL until October 2017. Just realized that this needs to be added to the topic since it is now an active championship in CMLL and already a FL. MPJ-DK (talk) 00:27, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support - seems OK to me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:44, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support: appropriate addition, and the topic still meets the criteria. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 15:13, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support good work as usual. Kees08 (Talk) 19:24, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support good work. --►Cekli 829 08:24, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with consensus to add Mexican National Heavyweight Championship to the topic.--十八 22:56, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

God of War franchise (1st supplementary nomination)

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/God of War franchise for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

God of War (2018 video game)

Getting the process going as God of War (2018 video game) became a Good Article on 30 November. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:30, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support - still a majority Featured so adding this keeps it a Featured Topic. MPJ-DK (talk) 02:31, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Didn't realize another nomination would be needed when this still met the criteria with the addition of the 2018 game? --JDC808 ♫ 03:27, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @JDC808: Well that's the correct way to do it. If a new article needs to be added to the topic than a supplementary nomination needs to be initiated. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:11, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Seems a bit unnecessary, but okay. If my vote counts (since I was the original nominator), I Support. --JDC808 ♫ 07:35, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support: appropriate addition, and the topic still meets the criteria. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 15:12, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kees08 (Talk) 19:22, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support good work. --►Cekli 829 08:25, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with consensus to add God of War (2018 video game) to the topic.--十八 22:50, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]