Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured and good topic removal candidates/2019 log

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Demoted

[edit]

Marvel Cinematic Universe Films

[edit]

Captain Marvel (film), Avengers: Endgame, Spiderman: Far From Home have not been made GA, are not in the process, and are outside the grace period. Additionally, Black Panther (film) has been delisted. Kees08 (Talk) 07:00, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Removal This valuable collection of articles on a series of mostly very good (and certainly very popular!) films never really met the criteria for good/featured topic status.
Most of the articles scraped by GA review without a thorough source check, which would have revealed too much of the text to be closely paraphrased or copy-pasted, and when not that the information is often not verified by the sources at all. The cast sections are uniformly poorly written (they are formatted based on poster billing rather than reliable secondary sources, leading to glorified cameos being given more emphasis than major players) and filled with OR (the character descriptions are often mish-mashes of what can be gleaned from various films in the same franchise), while most of the production and reception sections are barely-readable WP:QUOTEFARMs. Many of the articles only appear "stable" because of WP:OWN and WP:TAGTEAM behaviour on the part of a small group of editors who maintain them. A lot of the blame for this mess can probably be placed on the GA review process, where reviewers have a vested interest in passing the articles regardless of all else (Black Panther and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 stand out as examples that definitely never should have passed).
These and other reasons aside, I cannot support the maintenance of this group of articles as a featured topic at this time.
Hijiri 88 (やや) 03:50, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It just came to my attention that the retention period for Far From Home technically hasn't ended yet, and Black Panther was given a new retention period in July that ran out a few days after this discussion was opened. Not changing my !vote and hardly likely to do so for anyone else, but I just figured I should point it out. Hijiri 88 (やや) 05:56, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Naruto characters

[edit]

This topic is no longer complete. An article for Nagato (Naruto) was created in July 10, 2019‎ and has not been passed as a GA. Nagato is a Naruto character, and the article would need to pass a GAN for this topic to be complete. Aoba47 (talk) 18:08, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Remove topic I originally planned to make Nagato a GA but I think I ended busy with another article in the process. While I find potential for both Madara and Nagato since both present real world information, it might take too much for them to become GA.Tintor2 (talk) 14:22, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would say oppose, but both Nagato and Madara Uchiha seem like GA worthy articles. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 02:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Remove topic. Since we just got a third article since this discussion started, this should be removed for the time being. ミラP 21:16, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Remove as incomplete.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:46, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Halton Castle was delisted in January, so this topic fails criterion 3.a. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:39, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any prospects for Halton Castle to be improved in the near future?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ritchie333: Is this close enough to your usual editing areas of interest, or do you know someone else that would be interested in improving it? Kees08 (Talk) 18:30, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh crikey, this looks like a bit of a train wreck. I haven't got any of the sources and don't know anything about the castle really. From a quick look, everything looks cited to reliable sources, including the obligatory NHLE register and several books, but if an expert is claiming it's randomly picking sources without checking the general veracity of everything, then it's a pretty tall order to bring it back up to the required standard. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:01, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this topic due to it failing to meet criterion 3.b with Matt Taven not becoming a Good Article after more than 14 months since becoming champion. Armbrust The Homunculus 13:44, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Key video games

[edit]

Fails the criteria as Summer Pockets has not been promoted to GA status within the required timeframe (per Wikipedia:Featured topic criteria#Current retention periods). Tropicanan (talk) 09:19, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Super Smash Bros. series

[edit]

Nominating this topic due to it not meeting criterion 3.b with Super Smash Bros. Ultimate not be a Good Article three months after its release. GamerPro64 20:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best thing might be to light a fire under the asses of anyone interested in promoting Ultimate, but the nomination for removal is a sensible one. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:36, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Major League Baseball tie-breakers

[edit]

Characters of Halo

[edit]

Per 3.a, Cortana (Halo) is no longer a Featured Article. Cléééston (talk) 13:20, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Delist. Cortana had FA-status removed over four months ago, so the topic is past the grace period. Kranix (talk | contribs) 23:36, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ni no Kuni

[edit]

I am nominating this topic due to it failing to meet criterion 3.b with Ni no Kuni II: Revenant Kingdom not becoming a Good Article several months after the game's release. Armbrust The Homunculus 19:43, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]