(moved Clocking device to nomination archive (>10 days no consensus))
(moved Federation-Cardassian War to nomination archive (>10days no consensus))
Line 7: Line 7:
==Nominations with objections==
==Nominations with objections==
<!--When moving nominations to this section, add to top.-->
<!--When moving nominations to this section, add to top.-->
* [[Federation-Cardassian War]]. Self-Nominated. Think I've got all references to this conflict. [[User:Tyrant|Tyrant]] 19:19, 21 Feb 2005 (GMT)Tyrant
**'''Oppose''' - I'm sorry, but I really don't think this is good enough to make it as a featured article. Compared with [http://memory-alpha.org/en/index.php?title=Memory_Alpha:Featured_Articles&diff=49462&oldid=47986#Events other FAs of the same type], it's of significantly lesser quality. Whilst I recognise that this is because it has only been referred to in dialogue and snippets over half-a-dozen seasons, and may be comprehensive in terms of its coverage of what has been said, it doesn't ''feel'' like a Featured Article. In addition, the sectioning of the article is awkward, and indeed, poor. The small size of the article makes such sectioning unnecessary (and an "Overview" section is always frowned upon - such information should just be the initial paragraph, and not starting with a section header). Moreover, the content isn't correct - there has been no explanation as to the cause of the war, the references provided offer no evidence to support the paragraph. -- [[User:DarkHorizon|Michael Warren]] | [[User talk:DarkHorizon|''Talk'']] 21:15, 21 Feb 2005 (GMT)
***Can an article of this type be featured? As it cannot have the quality of the other events because the necessary information simply does not exist. The sectioning has been removed, as has the misinformation, which for the record came from [[Maquis]], I trusted it because that article is currently featured. Still maybe lacking ''feel''. [[User:Tyrant|Tyrant]] 19:29, 22 Feb 2005 (GMT)Tyrant
****''Any'' article can be a featured article, as long as it's good enough. The length of an article should not be considered here, it's about the quality of the writing, and of course all available information should be included. Since I don't remember the episodes referred to, Michael could be correst as far as I know in saying these references do not support "facts" written here. That should be checked by those who ''have'' seen the episodes. As last remark, I would suggest not using the two symbols of the powers involved in this conflict in such a fashion - IMO it looks rather akward. I don't think there are any images of the actual conflict available, though... For now, '''opposed''', but could make a well FA in the future. [[User:Ottens|Ottens]] 16:24, 23 Feb 2005 (GMT)
*****Well, I respect your opinions. I will make any changes requested of the community, as I would like to see this article featured. Futher suggestions? [[User:Tyrant|Tyrant]] 20:39, 23 Feb 2005 (GMT)Tyrant

Revision as of 18:31, 16 March 2005


Nominations without objections

Nominations with objections

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.