Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Good log/October 2008

55 Cancri

Main page	Articles
55 Cancri	55 Cancri b · 55 Cancri c · 55 Cancri d · 55 Cancri e 55 Cancri f

Major contributors: Chaos syndrome, BlueEarth, Nergaal

Soon the Solar System will have less planets than this one! Nergaal (talk) 13:19, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Z gin der 2008-10-17T14:17Z (UTC)
Comment - can we get a little navbox down the bottom of each page? Actually, this comment applies to other extrasolar system GTs as well, sorry I forgot to suggest this sooner but it shouldn't take much work to do one for all of them - rst20xx (talk) 01:50, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

done Nergaal (talk) 18:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - rst20xx (talk) 02:07, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comment - does BlueEarth know you've brought this nomination? rst20xx (talk) 11:54, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

probably not; is it necessary to drop him a notification? Nergaal (talk) 18:20, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do so, yes - rst20xx (talk) 02:07, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support good work --Admrboltz (talk) 02:15, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rreagan007 (talk) 18:49, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Meets criteria. Good articles, good navbox. Hpfan9374 (talk) 02:21, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - it appears BlueEarth has no input, so I'll support - rst20xx (talk) 16:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close with consensus to promote - rst20xx (talk) 16:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confessions

previous FTC

Main page	Articles
*Confessions*	"Yeah!" - "Burn" - "Confessions Part II" - "My Boo" - "Caught Up"

This is the third album of Usher and its five released singles. The album was successfullu as its singles. All are in good status. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 10:41, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ - impressive work to be sure, but while looking into this nom I came across Ride (song). While the song was never on the album (or never officially released for that matter!), I still feel that as it is related to the album, it should be included in the topic, or else the topic is not comprehensive. Having said that, it seems to me that this song is probably not notable to have its own article, in which case you can get the article AfDed. But until the status of this article is resolved, I feel I must oppose - rst20xx (talk) 15:37, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I solely worked on this series and nothing in the sources this song was mentioned. It was only a leaked track and I feel it will be AfDed. --Efe (talk) 06:11, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - There are no reliable sources so, if this get deleted, its hard to mention it in the article. Also, because of no significance, it would look like a trivia. --Efe (talk) 07:51, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - If it is AfDed, then I will support, but until that time, I shall oppose - rst20xx (talk) 14:41, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - No problem. --Efe (talk) 10:49, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Congrats you should be proud of yourself that you deleted a perfectly good article for the propose of this GT. Z gin der 2008-10-28T13:42Z (UTC)
        I wasn't the one that nominated it, nor did I vote for it. I think your comment suggests a lack of faith in the AfD process, not in my actions - rst20xx (talk) 23:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support–I do not feel that Ride should be part of the topic even if it was a FA. Z gin der 2008-10-23T17:09Z (UTC)
Support Topic is complete. I don't think Ride (song) should even have an article and will take it to AfD. If you want to recover it, it will be thataway. -- _{Escape Artist Swyer} ^Talk _{Contributions} 17:55, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support While I think it would be perfectly fine if Ride (song) were included in the topic, I don't think it is required for the topic to be complete. On a broader note, I think this is a bad road we have started going down, killing off perfectly good articles so they won't have to be included in a topic. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:19, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Ride was redirected, so I now feel I can support - rst20xx (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close as consensus to promote --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Rush of Blood to the Head

Main page	Articles
*A Rush of Blood to the Head*	"In My Place" - "The Scientist" - "Clocks" - "God Put a Smile upon Your Face"

The box contains the album and all of the singles released from it. Efe (talk · contribs) and myself have worked hard to bring the articles to GA. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 15:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support This follows the model of other FTs. Z gin der 2008-10-07T16:23Z (UTC)
Support - straightforward - rst20xx (talk) 10:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - excellent work! --TheLeft orium 21:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support igordebraga ≠ 14:31, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~~ This page was edited by ĈĠ 01:22, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Conditional~~ Support - I don't understand why these use AmE dates. There is a strong national tie and should use BrE date per MoS especially as that this is what the original contributor used [1][2][3][4]. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:04, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think its fine since its all consistent throughout. --Efe (talk) 13:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - You make a good point, but this isn't really the place to have that debate and it shouldn't stop the topic from being promoted. Rreagan007 (talk) 14:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - I know, "conditional" was the wrong word, I meant Support with comment really. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:47, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Ok that's fine. I was just making sure. Rreagan007 (talk) 15:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close as consensus to promote --142.162.19.56 (talk) 16:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pirates of the Caribbean films

previous FTC

Main page	Articles
Pirates of the Caribbean film series	Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl · Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest · Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End

Last nomination was halted due to "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the articles of the topic should consult regular editors of the articles prior to nomination.". Well, I nominated all four articles to GA, and after all but Curse of the Black Pearl were put on hold, I did all the work needed to pass in three of them. So, can this be a Good Topic now? igordebraga ≠ 14:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support I do not even consider that a rule. It is not one of the criteria and therefore is not actionable, it is rather a way to prevent articles that are worthy from being promoted if the contributors do not like FT's/GT's. Z gin der 2008-10-12T17:28Z (UTC)
Support - I agree, it is a purely obstructive idea, and should be opposed if used again. Good job! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Well I disagree, I do think it is a valid oppose, but I support this topic, nice work - rst20xx (talk) 00:17, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~~ This page was edited by ĈĠ 01:22, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rreagan007 (talk) 03:28, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - good job --Admrboltz (talk) 16:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - No problems. Gran² 18:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support --TheLeft orium 21:09, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close as consensus to promote --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 16:05, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Millennium Park

Main page	Articles
Millennium Park	Crown Fountain - Cloud Gate - Jay Pritzker Pavilion - McCormick Tribune Plaza & Ice Rink - BP Pedestrian Bridge - Lurie Garden - Harris Theater (Chicago) - Wrigley Square - Exelon Pavilions - McDonald's Cycle Center - Boeing Galleries - Chase Promenade - AT&T Plaza

While Torsodog (talk · contribs) and I continue to pursue WP:FACs for several at the items in hopes of qualifying it for WP:FT, we bring it here to WP:GTC. Currently, both Chase Promenade and AT&T Plaza are at WP:PR. Neither has much notable subject matter to add.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:06, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Articles have to complete PRs before than can be considered audited for quality. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The first WP:GTC I looked at was Slipknot discography and it seems to be considered eligible.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:56, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Should I withdraw this or hope for conditional support?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:56, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Either way. Personally I think you should get those PRs done, but you might get conditional support. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:58, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ and as a comment, you're right, I hadn't even noticed the peer reviews for the articles to do with Slipknot weren't finished. I shall go and switch my vote to oppose for that one, too. And as a comment, I personally will oppose the inclusion of any -articles until they've been nominated for GA, and failed solely due to inherent shortness. i.e., I want a very literal demonstration that these articles cannot pass GA - rst20xx (talk) 13:19, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ - You need to either get the two check marked articles to Good Article status or merge them, because they are not "unreleased items" or articles will a big potential for future growth. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:18, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment We just split AT&T Plaza from Cloud Gate due to complaints at WP:FAC. I will post both at WP:GAC and see how they are received.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - WOW Chase Promenade just passed. I think it may be one of the shortest GAs.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~I guess this should be considered On hold until the GACs/PRs have all finished, at which point the nom will effectively be able to start properly~~ - rst20xx (talk) 01:02, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- AT&T Plaza passed today.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:52, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support as GT now that all articles have passed GAC. To TonyTheTiger, don't worry, there are much shorter GAs, including New York State Route 164, one of my own. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 20:57, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - well done! And this whole exercise Tony also means that you have two more GAs to your name :) rst20xx (talk) 21:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the motivation and now support.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Fantastic work, good job! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great job getting those 2 articles to GA. Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 21:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Z gin der 2008-09-29T23:35Z (UTC)
Support – great work on these articles. —sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 00:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Someone close this - It has clearly passed, so load it up! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 12:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree. This has had five supports for ten days and six for eight days.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:02, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close with consensus to promote - Things have been a bit slow around here lately and I appologise for that. However, promotions are meant to stay open for 10 days, and in this case, only yesterday was that limit effectively met - rst20xx (talk) 10:33, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Supplementary nominations

HD 217107

Main page	Articles
HD 217107	HD 217107 b · HD 217107 c

All the articles have been promoted by the retired user Worldtraveller and probably together with the indef-blocked user Hurricane Devon.

For extrasolar planet systems! Nergaal (talk) 06:12, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support per precedent. Z gin der 2008-09-21T18:53Z (UTC)
Support - okay, I think WP:SPACE can now safely claim the most topics :P rst20xx (talk) 19:17, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support cute topic. -- _{Escape Artist Swyer} ^Talk _{Contributions} 20:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it. --Admrboltz (talk) 20:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - WikiProject Hurricanes is falling behind, ouch. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 04:27, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Good job! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The topic meets all aspects of the good topic criteria. Hpfan9374 (talk) 04:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close with unanimous consent. –thedemonhog talk • edits 22:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Key visual novels

Main page	Articles
Key (company)	Kanon - Air (visual novel) - Clannad (visual novel) - Planetarian: Chiisana Hoshi no Yume - Tomoyo After: It's a Wonderful Life - Little Busters! - Rewrite (visual novel)

I am nominating this for a Good Topic as all of the articles are GA, except for the last one which underwent a peer review, and since the article is so short, I believe the quality concerns for Rewrite (visual novel) have been met per the criteria. The related category Category:Key games holds the seven game articles, and the Good Topic title is taken from this category. ~~Unfortunately, a free-use image for use in the topic box (pending it's approval) is unavailable.~~--十八 05:09, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - though maybe the topic should be called "Key visual novels" instead of "Key games"? The precedent set by the videogames topics is to use "titles" but I think this would be inappropriate here as Key has also made non-visual novel titles such as the animation, which are not included here - rst20xx (talk) 19:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Key has participated in overseeing the animation and other adaptations of their titles, but if we're talking about products produced, then "Key titles" would work just as fine.--十八 03:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I see what you're saying, but I still think "Key titles" implies somewhat that the anime should maybe be included too. "Key visual novels" has no such problem - rst20xx (talk) 14:01, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, that sounds good then.--十八 19:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'll change it then - rst20xx (talk) 00:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support — great work on all of these visual novel articles. Keep it up. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 21:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - No reason to keep it from being a good topic when all of the articles excluding Rewrite is a good article, though I'd suggest something else other than "Key games" be used instead. -- クラウド６６８ 08:07, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment please change the name of the topic to something less confusing, say "Games released by Key". Nergaal (talk) 20:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Question I am totally confused, the topic is called Key games, which sounds like POV to begin with, then the lead article is about a company, that according to its first sentence makes visual novels. Are they visual novels or games? Second the main artilce talks about a lot of things that have nothing to do with the other artilces. Why is this topic compleate? Z gin der 2008-09-22T20:48Z (UTC)

A visual novel is a type of game. Reading the visual novel article might help :p sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 21:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While the main article also includes things like Key Sounds Label and Key Radio, it also covers all the pertinent information on the visual novels Key produces. The criteria states at point 2: The topic has an introductory and summary lead article or list which is exactly what Key (company) does.--十八 03:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. While I'm a big proponent of having the lead article and the topic title being the same, this is a good example of where a topic works where the lead article and title of the topic are different. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Had some concerns earlier about the topic title, but they've already been addressed. --erachima talk 03:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support I do not like the lead, but can live with it. Z gin der 2008-10-02T16:00Z (UTC)
Close with consensus to promote - rst20xx (talk) 22:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Supplementary nominations