Star Wars Fanon:Featured articles/Nominations

The featured articles of the wiki are articles that represent the best the Star Wars Fanon Wiki has to offer.

What makes a featured article or what article should you nominate to feature? To answer that, we've prepared a list just in case someone should ask that, and it is as follows.

An article must&hellip;


 * 1) &hellip;be a good article.
 * 2) &hellip;be well written and detailed, with at least one link to an article on Star Wars Fanon.
 * 3) &hellip;be unbiased, non-point of view.
 * 4) &hellip;all images must be captioned.
 * 5) &hellip;be sourced with all available appearances (if articles that involve said article subject are on this wiki).
 * 6) &hellip;be correctly categorized.
 * 7) &hellip;not be tagged with improvement tags at the time of nomination, or any other templates.
 * 8) &hellip;have a sufficiently detailed introduction that can be used for the front page featured box.
 * 9) &hellip;have a minimal amount of red links, and they must be insignificant red links. Important links must be filled.
 * 10) &hellip;have a complete, detailed "History" section, and a "Post mortem" section if the article is about a character that has died.
 * 11) &hellip;have a "Personality and traits" section for a character and "Charateristics" section if it is about a vehicle, class of vehicle etc.

For more information on what makes a featured article, see What is a featured article?.

How to nominate:


 * 1) First, nominate an article you find is worthy of featured status and that has previously been voted as a good article. You then put the nomination at the bottom of the list below; see criteria above.
 * 2) Others will object to the nomination if they disagree that the article is good enough; they will then supply reasons for doing so, and ways to improve the article (errors, style, organization, images, notability, sources).
 * 3) Supporters adjust the article until the objectors (with reasonable objections) are satisfied.
 * 4) A nominated article is not guaranteed to win featured article status simply because it has the most votes. It is up to the Decreton Lords to decide that, after voting on the winning nominee.

How to vote:


 * 1) Remember, you can only vote if you meet the requirements of the voting policy.
 * 2) Before doing anything, be sure to read the article completely, keeping a sharp eye out for mistakes.
 * 3) Afterwards, compare the article to the criteria listed above, and then either support or object the article's nomination.
 * 4) Whether you support or object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved. If you do not provide a valid reason for your support or opposition, such votes will be removed.
 * 5) As stated above, any objections will be looked upon by the nominator, supporters, and anyone willing to improve the article, and action will be taken to please the objectors.

How an article wins:
 * 1) For an article to gain the title of a "featured article", it must first win the nomination process for the Decreton Lords to review the article.
 * 2) Once the Decreton Lords review the winning nominees, the author(s) of the winning article(s) should try and please any complaints the Decreton Lords have about the article until the Decreton Lords unanimously vote for the article to become a featured one.
 * 3) If an article is voted in by the Decreton Lords, it will be added to the list of featured articles, the upcoming article queue, and to the history of featured articles.

Also remember to add nominated at the top of the article you are nominating.

In addition, put the number sign, #, next to your name so the votes can be counted. Please sign your posts as well!!

Current Standings
These standings are determined by who has the most votes. This only determines which Good articles will be considered for featured article status by the Decreton Lords.
 * 1) Darth Tyler (1)
 * 2) Darth Exemplar, Rafe Richter, Si'va Morrer (0)

=Nominations= Remember to supply concrete reasons for either your support or opposition of an article. If no valid reason is given, the vote will be nullified as soon as possible.

Support

 * 1) Well, pretty much all of the GAs should be made into FAs(and not put on the main page until then), but this one needs my support the most. Though some might not like the idea, it is a long, detailed article with good pictures and I don't really see anything wrong w/ it.
 * Invalid vote. No reason at all for why it should be an FA. Settled. SV undefined


 * 1) I don't see a valid reason why It shouldn't be an FA. The only gripe I have is what its about, but that doesn't matter. Its a well written article and deserves FA. [[Image:Swerto sig.jpg]]talk to the Swerto

Comments

 * When did we decided we needed a reason to support? I remember discussing it, but I don't remember ever agreeing on it.
 * We don't need to agree to it. It's common sense, and or else everyone would just be "This is my friend's so I support it". SV undefined
 * True, but many users have said they don't like the idea because they don't want to have to come up w/ a bunch of reasons why an article is good(though I'm not one of them). Anyway, I'll change my vote for now. The other thing, I just expanded my vote, and now its like a paragraph, if 10 people vote on 6 different articles, thats 60 paragraphs! IMO, thats unneccessary. I think that, by supporting, your saying that you think it meets all the requirements to be an FA, and thats why your supporting.
 * Then we'll have 60 paragraphs! It doesn't matter. Besides, if we just allow whatever votes, then users (like I said earlier) would vote based on whatever reasons, not just because they think an article is FA; they might just vote because it's their friend's article. It's necessary. SV undefined
 * Its not that important, but I disgree, when you oppose your saying how the article doesn't meet FA requirements, when you support your saying that it does meet requirements.
 * Untrue. I already said why; someone can support because the article is their friends or oppose because they don't like the concept or user. Therefore, it is necessary. SV undefined
 * I didn't say they shouldn't have to have a reason to oppose, just to support. Anyway, what difference does it make? If I'm a user that wants to support an article by my friend, how hard is it to find a reason to support? Basically, the only real reason to support is if the article meets all FA criteria, so if I'm a user who wants to support my friend's article, I just say it meets all criteria, maybe list some of them. How does that change anything?
 * Because that way they have reasons. How would someone feel if their article, up to FA standards, was outvoted by someone else's article (not up to FA standards) because a bunch of his friends voted it in, even though the article wasn't FA material. And it needs good reasons, not reasons like 'I like it' or 'This article sucks'. So it's not as easy to get by with them. And in the end, it doesn't matter, because this will be enforced. It applies to all voting, not just article voting. Applies to Admin voting too, which is why I believe some of the admin votes are invalid, but I have yet to speak my mind on that issue. SV undefined
 * Well, first of all, an article not up to FA standards shouldn't be able to make FA anyway, because the DL wouldn't let it pass. That kind of thing has happened, almost, but the DL didn't let it pass, so it didn't matter anyways. IMO, the support reason requirement is just a waste of bandwidth, because by supporting an article, a user should agree that it meets all FA standards, would you like them to simply post the FA requirements as their support reason?
 * For the record, Pinky, it's always been under "How to Vote". It's just never been enforced properly, something I made sure to change when this new policy came into effect. - Brandon Rhea 00:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * And no, it hasn't. I checked a revision right before the page was last cleared, it said oppose votes must have a reason, but it never mentions support votes.
 * Ah, yes, that's why I saw it days ago when I made the How to Vote for the GA noms. Paradox! - Brandon Rhea 00:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Um, are you saying I'm wrong? Because I'm pretty sure I'm not. look here.
 * I'm saying I'm pretty sure I know what I saw and I know what I wrote on the GA page. You can go check it out if you want. It's the same thing - word for word. - Brandon Rhea 03:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, just look at the history, it was added by Vic, following the clearing of the last FA noms.
 * Yes, that was just added today, to make it more obvious. I, however, am referring to Part 3.1 of "How to Vote" that says "Whether you support or object, please supply concrete reasons for doing so, and how it can be improved. If you do not provide a valid reason for your support or opposition, such votes will be removed." The addition of this is not in recent history. - Brandon Rhea 03:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * here line 40. Tell me what you see.
 * So I missed that, whatever. The fact of the matter is that they will both be enforced in the future for both FAs and GAs. - Brandon Rhea 03:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well that was a lot of time arguing over something very small. Anyway, IMO thats a waste, but its not all that hard to paste "FA requirements" so I'm good with it.
 * It doesn't matter. It will be enforced for both. SV undefined