Difference between revisions of "Team Fortress Wiki talk:Featured articles"
m (→Possible overhaul) |
m (→Possible overhaul) |
||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
:Me likey. Shock394 22:54, 8 March 2011 (UTC) | :Me likey. Shock394 22:54, 8 March 2011 (UTC) | ||
:{{c|support}} Makes sense to me. I do not know if it is currently the case (it may be), but it might be a good idea if one of the bots added the feature article to the Main page automatically, rather than requiring a staff member to "promote" it manually. The bot would simply select the article with the most votes, which would help to automate the system and ensure that, even if only six people out of the entire Wiki voted within the nominated period, the candidate with the most support would be automatically selected. I do not know how feasible this is, but I thought that I would submit it for consideration. [[User:Esquilax|Esquilax]] 23:44, 8 March 2011 (UTC) | :{{c|support}} Makes sense to me. I do not know if it is currently the case (it may be), but it might be a good idea if one of the bots added the feature article to the Main page automatically, rather than requiring a staff member to "promote" it manually. The bot would simply select the article with the most votes, which would help to automate the system and ensure that, even if only six people out of the entire Wiki voted within the nominated period, the candidate with the most support would be automatically selected. I do not know how feasible this is, but I thought that I would submit it for consideration. [[User:Esquilax|Esquilax]] 23:44, 8 March 2011 (UTC) | ||
+ | :{{c|support}} Not a bad idea at all. [[User:Pierow|Pierow]] 07:24, 9 March 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:24, 9 March 2011
Possible overhaul
As recently highlighted on the discussion page, the featured article project needs help. Currently anyone who feels a page is eligible can simply make a tiny submission under 'it's awesome' or to that extent, without placing the required template on the article's talk page. Additionally, voting on these candidates is sparse and no general discussion is made. In fact the discussion appears to stray from the required 'is it in good form/layout' to 'do we really want people to see this on the front page?', a form of policy which is not even considered in the guidelines.
I therefore propose an overhaul of the current system with the possible implementation of the following:
- Only open up featured article candidacy at the end of a month, with a possible grace period, where people may make submissions and vote on the page candidates. Less pages will appear in limbo waiting for a vote, and it sets a regime for when the featured article will change.
- The winning page with the most votes should be featured for a month only, until the next voting period begins.
- Put all previous candidate discussions in an archive, so as not to clutter up the page or imply the discussion is still ongoing.
- Have the featured article template on the main page of candidates. This is a more observable space and will encourage editors to vote.
- Rework the entry requirements. If policy decisions are a key requirement, it should be listed as such. If all pages have an equal chance of being featured, then it should be specified as such. Currently the requirements are vague on this point.
I feel these are all simple suggestions that require little expenditure from moderators or administrators to upkeep, whilst bringing quality and organisation to the project. --Focusknock 10:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
- Me likey. Shock394 22:54, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
- Support Makes sense to me. I do not know if it is currently the case (it may be), but it might be a good idea if one of the bots added the feature article to the Main page automatically, rather than requiring a staff member to "promote" it manually. The bot would simply select the article with the most votes, which would help to automate the system and ensure that, even if only six people out of the entire Wiki voted within the nominated period, the candidate with the most support would be automatically selected. I do not know how feasible this is, but I thought that I would submit it for consideration. Esquilax 23:44, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
- Support Not a bad idea at all. Pierow 07:24, 9 March 2011 (UTC)