Forum:New Good Article Standards; knocked down

As Brandon has previously announced, the Good Article voting and nominations were recently suspended for the time being, due to the revised requirements I was writing. Well we were originally waiting for the Mary Sue policy recently proposed to pass, but since it's taking to long, we don't want to delay the Good Article process any longer. So here are the new, proposed Good Article standards; note that they are far less challenging and a lot easier to meet. Also meet that if the Mary Sue policy does pass, it will by default be added into this policy. This proposal is straight up voting. Voting ends on April 10, 2008, two weeks from right now.

Proposal:

In order to be a Good Article, an article must:
 * 1) &hellip; be identified with proper era icons.
 * 2) &hellip; be well written, comprehensive and detailed; however, not to the extent of the requirement for a Featured Article.
 * 3) To be well written, the article must have a prose that is engaging and of a professional standard.
 * 4) To be detailed, an article must be written in an encyclopedic format with no point of view in the detail, though that detail is not excess nor irrelevant; instead, the detail must also contact all relevant major facts and plot points.
 * 5) The article must acknowledge and explore all aspects of the subject and cover every encyclopedic angle.
 * 6) The article does not need to have a finished storyline.
 * 7) The article must be clear, using a logical structure written in plain language.
 * 8) The article must follow standard writing conventions of modern English (ie, correct grammar, punctuation and spelling).
 * 9) All grammar and spelling must be one hundred percent accurate. The High Priests and voting members of the community will inspect all of it to make proper edits.
 * 10) &hellip; have an introduction of at least one-hundred and fifty (150) words that summarizes the entire topic and prepares the reader for the greater detail in the following sections.
 * 11) &hellip; follow the Manual of Style, Layout Guide, categorization policy, as well as all other policies.
 * 12) &hellip; contain enough images where appropriate, but the page is not cluttered or overstocked.
 * 13) &hellip; ensure that all images in said article follow the standards of sourcing in the Image policy.
 * 14) &hellip; not be tagged with improvement tags at the time of nomination.
 * 15) &hellip; have absolutely no red links, as they must be filled with at least stubs or not be linked to at all.
 * 16) &hellip; have no links in section titles.
 * 17) &hellip; have a brief "Personality and traits" section that generalizes the character's said personality
 * 18) &hellip; be stable, meaning that it is not the subject of any edit wars and that the content does not change significantly from day to day, reversions of vandalism and improvements based on suggestions not applying.

--Victor Dorantes (discussion) (contributions) 05:13, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Support (1)

 * 1) As the proposer, yes. --Victor Dorantes (discussion) (contributions) 05:13, 28 March 2008 (UTC)