Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Featured log/September 2016
Good topic candidates: view - edit - history
- Contributor(s): Floydian
This extensive topic covers the 400-series highways of Ontario, the major freeway network of the province, which includes the busiest freeway in the world as well as the first divided highway in North America. Aside from one article on a highway under construction (which lacks crucial data until it is opened), every article is a GA at a minimum, and many are A or FA. (note that Highway 412 is undergoing a GAN as it was only completed on Monday) -- Floydian τ ¢ 15:51, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: I thought the proper procedure was to wait until it's passed GA? There is no way of knowing how long it will be before it's passed for GA and all. MPJ-DK 20:36, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
- And a "future class"? has that been peer reviewed etc. to hit the mark for content that may not be able to get to GA/FA status yet? MPJ-DK 20:37, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
- The GAN for Highway 412 is done and only awaiting promoted. However, I did miss the ball on sending Highway 418 for a peer review. Doing that in a minute. Unless a fellow WP:HWY member takes it on in the next 24 hours (I'll deal with any issues quickly), I'll put this nomination on hold and remove it from the queue. - Floydian τ ¢ 22:57, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
- Note: Ontario Highway 412 has just passed GA. --Rschen7754 03:56, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- I would be happy to support once the comments at the peer review are resolved. --Rschen7754 04:53, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
- Support the issues at the peer review were resolved. --Rschen7754 18:01, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
- I would be happy to support once the comments at the peer review are resolved. --Rschen7754 04:53, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
- Support, looks like a fine topic. Nergaal (talk) 16:22, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
- Comment I remember seeing somewhere that FT/GT boxes shouldn't show a WikiProject A-Class rating (just FA/FL/GA/Peer reviewed) so that should be fixed. I can't quite remember where I saw it unfortunately. - [[User:Yellow Dingo|Yellow Dingo]] (talk) 05:20, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
- If anyone else can second that info, I'd be happy to change it. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Floydian: seconded- FT/GT only supports project-wide processes, and A-class is wikiproject specific. See the top box at WP:FT - there's no mention of A-class. I've changed it for you. --PresN 01:17, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
- Oh, and Support; that PR should have been closed a long time ago. Incidentally, I think this may be the first "AA-class" (audited article) inclusion that isn't for an unreleased piece of media (video game, movie, etc.). --PresN 01:17, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
- If anyone else can second that info, I'd be happy to change it. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
- support since the "future class" issue has been addressed, great work. MPJ-DK 14:36, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
- Support since the icons and future-class issues have been fixed. - Yellow Dingo (talk) 07:34, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. - GamerPro64 20:19, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
- Contributor(s): Lemonade51
I'm nominating this as a complete topic, a comprehensive account of Arsenal's final season in the Football League, supplemented by a cup shock and Charity Shield clash with local rivals, Tottenham. --Lemonade51 (talk) 20:06, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support – As the reviewer of the Wrexham vs. Arsenal game, I have read all articles and am satisfied that the topic is extensively covered and complete. MWright96 (talk) 09:30, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Great topic and no obvious gaps. Great work! NapHit (talk) 15:09, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support - can't see any issues here -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:56, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
- Support - small topic but I don't discriminate on size ;-) MPJ-DK 21:29, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic.--十八 21:30, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Red Dead Redemption
[edit]
Good Topic Nomination for the three subarticles of Red Dead Redemption, a video game whose importance is explained above. Rhain did most of the work here—I just did the downloadable content. Special thanks to the GA reviewers: @Teancum, Jaguar, and ProtoDrake (x2) czar 05:29, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
- Question: From what I can tell, Red Dead Revolver is the only Red Dead article not included in this topic. Is there a reason the topic can't be expanded to include Revolver as well?--IDVtalk 12:17, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
- @IDV, there's no continuity between Revolver and Redemption as a "Red Dead" series/franchise besides the name and genre, so there accordingly isn't enough coverage to warrant a separate series-level article. But the three in this topic are indeed subarticles of Redemption. (If Revolver and Redemption had a parent topic, it would be Rockstar games and not a Red Dead series/franchise.) czar 17:17, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
- All right, thanks for the clarification. The articles all look good, so I will support this topic.--IDVtalk 19:25, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
- @IDV, there's no continuity between Revolver and Redemption as a "Red Dead" series/franchise besides the name and genre, so there accordingly isn't enough coverage to warrant a separate series-level article. But the three in this topic are indeed subarticles of Redemption. (If Revolver and Redemption had a parent topic, it would be Rockstar games and not a Red Dead series/franchise.) czar 17:17, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Rhain and Czar have done wonders with this topic, and it rightly deserves recognition. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:49, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Despite some confusions I felt like all the video game publications being written in the italics for the expansion, I think it could become a Good Topic. Also, I'm totally not inviting people to my peer review. Good work.Tintor2 (talk) 00:00, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
- @GamerPro64 and Juhachi, anything else needed for this nomination? czar 03:19, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support - WP:VG continues to have a great performance with topics. igordebraga ≠ 16:59, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic.--十八 21:19, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
- Contributor(s): Zwerg Nase
The season article has recently been granted GA status, all the race reports have achieved the same over the course of last year. The articles clearly have a common theme and are linked together with both a template (races) and in the infobox of the races (link to season article). --Zwerg Nase (talk) 23:23, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support nice to see some novel topic topic. Nergaal (talk) 19:00, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support Fantastic work by Zwerg Nase to bring this topic up to the standard it has achieved. MWright96 (talk) 11:55, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support -- great undertaking, I don't think you can ask for more than the season overview plus every race being covered by a GA-level article; well done. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:42, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support - every article is very informative and I'm pleased to see that as an F1 fan! I'm glad the main season article has passed as it neatly wraps together the whole topic now. Spiderone 10:27, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. --十八 20:48, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Los Espantos
[edit]Contributors: MPJ-DK
I am nominating this groups of articles for Good Topic status as I believe they hit all the marks necessary. There are nine articles in total. All are Good Articles. It covers all possible Espanto Articles that can currently be created so no gaps. They are clearly covering a similar topic and inter-connected. There is a lead article. The only challenge is that I don't have a free use image of any of Espantos. This is my first ever "Good Article" nomination and the first Lucha libre potential Good Topic as well. Any and all comments and suggestions are welcome. Thanks in advance. MPJ-DK 20:41, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- Given that they all wore the same mask, could an image similar to File:Mascara El Santo.jpg be created and used as the topic image? Just a thought........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:50, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- That is possible yes, the design is not complicated. Unfortunately that is beyond my skillset to create and still look good. MPJ-DK 16:37, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- Support, seems like a fine topic. 16:21, 16 July 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nergaal (talk • contribs) 21:08, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support; looks good. Meets the criteria. - Yellow Dingo (talk) 09:29, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support - can't see any issues here -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:56, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
- Support nomination, all articles meet criteria for good topic. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. - GamerPro64 20:22, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
- Contributor(s): Aoba47
This topic covers the seven members of the Russell family, a fictional family that appeared on the American television soap opera Passions, which aired on NBC (1999–2007) and later on DirecTV (2007–08). I have been working on this a lot since the beginning of January and all eight articles have recently been passed as GAs. I would love to have this be a good topic because it would be the first one for a soap opera (as far as I am aware) and would bring more attention to this particular show. Any comments would be greatly appreciated! Thank you in advance! Aoba47 (talk) 03:29, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
- Driveby comment: I have removed the image that was in use on this page. Non-free images should not be used outside of the mainspace. Josh Milburn (talk) 17:42, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
- @Josh Milburn: Thank you for the correction! Aoba47 (talk) 19:16, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
- Support: Looks good, meets WP:WIAGT. - Yellow Dingo (talk) 09:27, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 03:58, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support nomination, all articles meet criteria for good topic. Best – jona ✉ 18:16, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 19:06, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support Aoba47 Looks great as always! Carbrera (talk) 22:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC).
- @Carbrera: Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 22:19, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. - GamerPro64 01:54, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
- Contributor(s): J Milburn
A political theorist and his two books. I know that he has plans for another book, but I can't see it appearing for a while yet, and, even when it does (due to the "speed" of academic publishing) it won't have sufficient coverage to be considered notable for a while longer. --Josh Milburn (talk) 11:01, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Support Comment -- Tks for this series of articles, Josh. Just procedurally, I think we're supposed to put a link to the nomination on the article talk pages -- seem to recall it being in the instructions anyway... Content-wise, did you consider whether Centre for Animals and Social Justice should be part of the topic given Cochrane's a founder member? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:45, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- P.S. Excellent work getting such an engaging photo of the subject! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk)!
- Thanks for the comments; I've added the talk page template. I'll have a muse on the CASJ... Josh Milburn (talk) 23:00, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- Not saying it should. I mean if the topic is the guy and his works (i.e. his notable literary output) then CASJ isn't necessary and the topic is comprehensive. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:51, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- I had a think on this; a number of people are affiliated with the centre, and other founding members include Dan Lyons and Robert Garner. The centre could probably be a topic in its own right, but if the article was going to go into a particular person's topic, it would be Lyons's. Josh Milburn (talk) 08:57, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- Fair enough -- happy to support now. Pls note, I fixed a harv error in the main article but there's a few in Animal Rights Without Liberation that I'd prefer you look at -- do you know about Ucucha's checker tool? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:12, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the support; I don't know about the tool, where would I find it? Josh Milburn (talk) 15:19, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- Here you go. Once installed, it highlights things automatically -- unlike Ucucha's duplink checker/highlighter, you don't have to invoke it for a particular article. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:04, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
- Great, thanks, I've fixed the errors. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:44, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
- Here you go. Once installed, it highlights things automatically -- unlike Ucucha's duplink checker/highlighter, you don't have to invoke it for a particular article. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:04, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the support; I don't know about the tool, where would I find it? Josh Milburn (talk) 15:19, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- Fair enough -- happy to support now. Pls note, I fixed a harv error in the main article but there's a few in Animal Rights Without Liberation that I'd prefer you look at -- do you know about Ucucha's checker tool? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:12, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- I had a think on this; a number of people are affiliated with the centre, and other founding members include Dan Lyons and Robert Garner. The centre could probably be a topic in its own right, but if the article was going to go into a particular person's topic, it would be Lyons's. Josh Milburn (talk) 08:57, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- Not saying it should. I mean if the topic is the guy and his works (i.e. his notable literary output) then CASJ isn't necessary and the topic is comprehensive. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:51, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments; I've added the talk page template. I'll have a muse on the CASJ... Josh Milburn (talk) 23:00, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- Topic seems fine, but the 3 articles are not liked with a template. Nergaal (talk) 14:30, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
- Is that necessary? The article on Cochrane is on the animal rights template, while one of the books is on another navbox; I'm not sure creating a new navbox with three articles (and three articles which all link to each other quite heavily) would be that beneficial. Josh Milburn (talk) 17:39, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: One article promoted to FA. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:47, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support: Looks good; meets WP:WIAGT. - Yellow Dingo (talk) 09:26, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Meets WP:GT?. Good work! Graham (talk) 05:17, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- I should also note that while the articles are not linked by a navbox, that is not required by WP:GT? and it would not be appropriate in this case. Graham (talk) 05:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. - GamerPro64 17:13, 11 September 2016 (UTC)