(-Shran, -Klingon Civil War (successful nominations))
Line 6: Line 6:
A good description of the Romulan species, it's history and culture. [[User:Ottens|Ottens]] 13:19, 7 Jun 2004 (CEST)
A good description of the Romulan species, it's history and culture. [[User:Ottens|Ottens]] 13:19, 7 Jun 2004 (CEST)
Self-nomination. A detailed description of events surrounding one of my favorite ENT-era characters. -- [[User:MinutiaeMan|Dan Carlson]] 19:50, 27 May 2004 (CEST)
*Seconded. Highly detailed for a character who has had so few appearances. -- [[User:DarkHorizon|Michael Warren]] 00:51, 1 Jun 2004 (CEST)
*Seconded. It's a bit more ellaborate in it's discriptions then most articles, but that's good in this case. -- [[User:Redge|Redge]] 15:41, 5 Jun 2004 (CEST)
*Seconden. Indeed a very good and detailed description on one of the recurring characters. [[User:Ottens|Ottens]] 13:21, 7 Jun 2004 (CEST)
*Seconded yet again. --[[User:Steve Mollmann|Steve]] 17:47, 7 Jun 2004 (CEST)
===[[Klingon Civil War]]===
Self-nomination. IMO a great historically-oriented article providing in-depth analysis of the ''causes and events'' of the conflict. -- [[User:MinutiaeMan|Dan Carlson]] 19:50, 27 May 2004 (CEST)
*Slightly reluctant seconding. A great article, with extensive detail, but I'm concerned about the over-abundance of history articles (over 50%) in [[Memory Alpha:Featured Articles|Featured]] at the moment. -- [[User:DarkHorizon|Michael Warren]] 00:51, 1 Jun 2004 (CEST)
** Hey, I'm a ''history'' major! :-P -- [[User:MinutiaeMan|Dan Carlson]] 16:35, 1 Jun 2004 (CEST)
* Seconded. If an article is good, it should be featured, regardless of previous nominations. If we want to balance the featured list out, we should write great articles about other subjects and nominate them. -- [[User:Redge|Redge]] 15:12, 5 Jun 2004 (CEST)
* Seconded. Amazing thorough! --[[User:Steve Mollmann|Steve]] 17:47, 7 Jun 2004 (CEST)
==Nominations with objections==
==Nominations with objections==

Revision as of 21:39, 7 June 2004


Nominations without objections

Add new nominations on top, one section per nomination.


A good description of the Romulan species, it's history and culture. Ottens 13:19, 7 Jun 2004 (CEST)

Nominations with objections

USS Equinox

Self-nomination. A detailed analysis of the ship's voyage - IMO, a change from the (somewhat necessarily) formulaic nature of the starship entries. -- Michael Warren 00:51, 1 Jun 2004 (CEST)

  • Seconded. Nice detail for a "generic" starship article. -- Dan Carlson 16:35, 1 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • Opposed. It's a very good article, especially for a ship only mentioned in two eppisodes. However, the ammount of info available is irrelevant when featuring an article. And IMO this article does not messure up with the rest of the featured articles. No offence, how could it with so little info to go on. It's good, but not good enough to be featured. -- Redge 15:39, 5 Jun 2004 (CEST)
    • The article is not of the same type as other featured articles, so should not be compared with them. I believe this article meets the majority of criteria that are covered in Memory Alpha:The perfect article. On amount of info available and length, I refer you to the point This may not be possible for all articles, of course, because information may not be available for all aspects of the subject. However, where such information is available, it should always be included. -- Michael Warren 18:31, 5 Jun 2004 (CEST)

Miles O'Brien

Self-nomination. You didn't think I'd do all that work and not nominate it, did you? ;) Highly detailed description of the character, with good layout and division of information. Maybe one or two more pretty pictures to go in, but is essentially complete. -- Michael Warren 00:51, 1 Jun 2004 (CEST)

  • Seconded. -- Dan Carlson 16:35, 1 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • Seconded again. Thirded, if you will. --Fox Mulder 17:52, 2 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • Opposed. Maybe it can be nominated later, but first I would try and clean up some of the red inkt on this page. Also, I'm not seeing any source whatsoever. And finally, I can't find any note on why he was never promoted beyond the rank of Chief Petty Officer, which is very odd indeed, since as the Chief Engineer of DS9, he should at least have been Lieutenant, if not Commander. If you can correct this first, it will make a fine featured article. -- Redge 15:39, 5 Jun 2004 (CEST)
    • O'Brien is an enlisted officer. He cannot have an officer's rank (despite the rank pip mistakes) because of this. He was promoted from Chief to Master Chief in transferring to DS9, a fact which is mentioned in the article. And what do you mean by source? I wrote this myself. If you're referring to references, I can add some in, but I don't particularly like them in the article, because they clutter up the writing, IMO.
    • The fact that other articles linked off this page have not been created does not mean the article is bad, it means that it builds the web well, and allows further expansion of the wiki by offering new articles to create. Judge the content, not the links. -- Michael Warren 18:31, 5 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • Vote is yes. If you make an article with lots of red links a featured article, chances are they are going to be all turned blue faster than if you didn't. Also, there's no place for speculation about what rank O'Brien should be unless you mean there should be additional background info. O'Brien was explicitly stated to be a Chief Petty Officer from TNG:"Family" on and they have maintained that in dialogue whenever mentioned afterwards, even though his insignia remained inconsistent. Lack of speculation is not a detractor from this article --Captainmike 21:15, 5 Jun 2004 (CEST)
    • Very well, but at the very least you really should incorporate references. They may not be very good for style, layout and overall readability of the article (pardon my spelling), but they really are necessary and also usefull to find episodes that are relevant tot the character. Supose someone wants to know where you base those conclusions on, or someone wants to find out more about O'Brien and is looking for relevant episodes? -- Redge 12:50, 7 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • Maybe it does need references, but I'll go ahead and second it anyway. --Steve 17:47, 7 Jun 2004 (CEST)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.