Forum:CT:Legacy sections in featured articles

I just want to propose a slight change to the featured article requirements. Right now, we require a “Legacy” section for every character article that’s nominated for featured article. That’s because when this set of requirements was made, pretty much all character FAs were super duper mega ultra uber powerful characters who had some sort of major insanely awesomely awesome impact on the galaxy. That’s not really the case anymore, so it’s not really right to require a legacy section for all characters. I’d also like to propose the same thing for war and battle articles.

Character requirements

It currently says this: “Provided that the character is dead, the article must have a detailed section describing the legacy of the character. Stating that the character did not do anything of major importance is not an option, as influence does not necessarily mean influence on a major galactic scale. Characters always influence those around them, so the legacy that the character left on his friends, family or associates must be given.”

I would like to change it to say this: “If said information is available, a “Legacy” section is required on all character articles.”

Very basic, very simple. It still says that they’re required, but it makes allowances for either minor characters who wouldn’t have a major impact or sourced articles that don’t have that information available.

War/battle requirements

It currently says this: ... “have a detailed legacy section describing all of the major impacts that the war or battle had on the history of the galaxy, an organization or a person after that. Stating that the war or battle did not do anything of major importance or that it had no significant impact is not an option, as influence does not necessarily mean influence on a major galactic scale. Wars and battles are always a major influence on those that participate in it, so how the legacy impacted organizations or people must be given, if nothing else.”

I would like to change it to say this: “If said information is available, a “Legacy” section is required on all character articles.”

Very basic, very simple. It still says that they’re required, but it makes allowances for either minor battles and wars that wouldn’t have a major impact or sourced articles that don’t have that information available.

Now for both of these two types of articles, the Seers will know whether you’re just being lazy if you’re saying “there’s no information available” or “the character/battle didn’t have that kind of impact.” Unless the article is sourced, a read through of the article can tell Seers and other users whether or not a legacy section would be warranted. We can still require you to have it if we deem it necessary using rules 2.3 and 2.5 of the general featured article requirements.

Just as a note, I plan to roll out a proposal for new featured article requirements soon. I just want to finish my proposal for a new Manual of Style before then, because I don’t like the idea of coming out with better FA requirements that say “follow the MOS” when the MOS is trash. I wanted to get this amendment out of the way, though, since it could hold up some FANs and actually warrant their rejection.

Anyway, the vote will last for at least one week, until 12/19/09, unless more or less time is required. All matters of the voting policy apply. Please be civil. - Brandon Rhea  (talk) 17:06, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Support (1)

 * 1) Brandon Rhea Alliance Starbird.svg (talk) 17:06, December 12, 2009 (UTC)