m (→‎[[Leslie]]: support vote)
(→‎[[Cardassian]]: rmv - no new votes after 12 days)
Line 2: Line 2:
==Nominations without objections==
==Nominations without objections==
'''Nominate''': I personally put a lot of work into the article, cleaning it up and adding information and citations, prior to putting the page up in the peer review section. This page was in the peer review section for a couple of months, though no one commented on how to improve it there, slowly people have tweaked it to near perfection (there will always be room for improvement on any article). The article is very in-depth and covers just about everything you need or will want to know about the Cardassian people. I think this article is more than worthy of being a featured article. - [[User:Thot Prad|Thot Prad]] 02:54, 23 December, 2006 (UTC)
:I'd like to see a better choice of images here for this article to become featured. Currently, there are 5 portrait photos, and nothing else. While it makes sense to show Cardassians at different ages, I'm not sure a bland "listing" of female/male/young/old is the best way to go. I'd suggest to remove at least the Enabran Tain image (shows nothing of importance), move the remaining ones to appropriate sections (for example Mila to "Society and culture", which talks about aging), and then find other, relevant images. What about a Cardassian child? An image showing a cardassian court, general architecture, government buildings, technology? -- [[User:Cid Highwind|Cid Highwind]] 13:43, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
:: I have added a ton of images and placed them throughout the article, including Cardassian orphans, Mila in the part which discusses age, the Cardassian Chief Archon, public trials, etc. If there are anymore changes necessary, let me know. - [[User:Thot Prad|Thot Prad]] 15:24, 24 December, 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' - I like the recent picture changes to this article. It goes quite indepth, features a great amount of information and is very informative. - [[User:Enzo Aquarius|Enzo Aquarius]] 13:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''Support''' - Finally had time to read through this, recent changes have moved this from good to great. Nice work. -[[User:Humu­humu­nuku­nuku­āpuaʻa|Humu­humu­nuku­nuku­āpuaʻa]] 22:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
==Nominations with objections==
==Nominations with objections==

Revision as of 00:14, 16 January 2007


Nominations without objections

Nominations with objections

Thomas Riker

Self-nomination. I've spent a great deal of work on this article, and it was listed as peer-reviewed for 2 weeks without any feedback. I think this would make for an excellent Featured Article, and I welcome feedback and/or thoughts. -Humu­humu­nuku­nuku­āpuaʻa 16:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Support. Well done, to all who were involved with this article. :) --From Andoria with Love 20:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Haven't read the text itself yet, but what I immediately noticed was the bad image quality. All three images (Image:Thomas Riker (2369).jpg, Image:Thomas Riker.jpg, Image:Thomas Riker 2371.jpg) currently on the page show serious artifacts from either the bad VHS tape this was taken from, or from JPEG compression. If those exact images are to be kept, I would at least like to see them re-uploaded in better quality. Additionally, I could see one of the two similar "2369" images be removed from the sidebar and another one, perhaps showing Thomas with either Will, Deanna, or both, be added where appropriate. Regarding the sidebar in general, a possible "Featured article" might be a good start to think about what's really important to have on a character sidebar. Is "Created as duplicate" or "Affiliation:Maquis" really something we need to have on the sidebar (instead of in the text)? I'll leave another note once I read the article text itself. -- Cid Highwind 20:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Noted regarding the graphics. I'll see if I can acquire better screenshots. I'm going to copy your comment and add it to the Talk:Thomas Riker/peerreview page. Any willing to assist in improving the article are advised to take the discussion there. -Humu­humu­nuku­nuku­āpuaʻa 15:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: I now read the whole text and left another note one the peer review page. If those two points are addressed, I'd support this nomination. -- Cid Highwind 13:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: New versions of images have been uploaded, as has a new image of Tom and Deanna. I welcome futher comments/support. I have decided to leave both 2369 images in the sidebar, as other FA have set this precedent (Jean-Luc Picard, etc) -Humu­humu­nuku­nuku­āpuaʻa 21:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, very thorough. -- Jaz talk27px 02:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


This biography of the franchise's leading extra is suprisingly exhaustive and entertaining. It rivals the articles on James T. Kirk and Spock, which may not be inappropriate since the character appeared in the second TOS pilot, and remained throughout the series run. He has even been through death and life, just as his more illustrious crewmates have done. (I had nothing to do with this article, but it is interesting to note that the bulk of the work has been done by unnamed archivists identified only by IP numbers.)

  • Support. --GNDN 17:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Kyle C. Haight 13:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. There sure is a lot of good info here, and I want to see this as a FA, but as is, I suggest a peer review. There are a lot of one-sentence paragraphs that should be merged, as well as some other copyediting. Good suggestion GNDN, let's work on improving this article. -Humu­humu­nuku­nuku­āpuaʻa 16:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm new to this nomination business, but I do support -Humu­humu­nuku­nuku­āpuaʻa's suggestion regarding peer review. If we go this route, should the nomination be tabled (or de-listed)? In the alternative, could peer review be conducted concurrently? --GNDN 02:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Support as is. I love how he has relationships with other background characters. Cracks me up. Jaf 00:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)Jaf
  • Support Very interesting article, lots of information. - Enzo Aquarius 15:45, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong support The length, breadth, and depth of this article are the definition of Memory Alpha at its best. It's so good, it makes other articles look bad by comparison. -- StAkAr Karnak 18:29, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. I'm amazed and impressed with such a thorough, serious approach to an extra. --Sasoriza 03:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.