Nominations without objections

  • United. Self-nominated. Extensive summary with pictures. --Defiant | Talk 21:06, 23 Feb 2005 (GMT)
Needs to include the rest of her appearances (or just an all out list of all her appearances) that aren't included in the article itself. --Gvsualan
Added list of appearences on TOS. Ottens 20:47, 18 Feb 2005 (GMT)
  • Observer Effect. I tried to make this a good page, I think I succeeded. Has detailed information and pictures. --Defiant | Talk 15:11, 18 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Seeing the episode may take less time then reading the description here ;-) But really EXCELLENT work, very extended write-up of the episode, and you picked some good accompanying images. Keep up the fantastic work! Ottens 16:08, 18 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Supported. Tyrant 19:19, 21 Feb 2005 (GMT)Tyrant
  • Constitution class. I don't think I've missed any information. Especially an extended interior design tour, and extensive background and design information. Ottens 16:27, 15 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Supported Tyrant 17:10, 15 Feb 2005 (GMT)Tyrant
    • Supported - All the important points seem to be there; the article is well-written. -- Balok 18:36, 15 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Support. Good, well rounded article. -- SmokeDetector47 00:53, 16 Feb 2005 (GMT)
  • Telek R'Mor: an article I made a modest effort in making what it is today. --Gvsualan 01:08, 13 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Support pending. I don't know if guest characters should or can be featured at all. Nervertheless, it's a good article. --BlueMars 17:41, 13 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Strong support. Anything can be an FA, provided it is of good enough quality. Consider the discussion when I nominated USS Equinox, my own similar "guest character" article. -- Michael Warren | Talk 20:13, 13 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Supported. It has everything a featured article needs. Ottens 16:29, 15 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Support. Lots of info on a relatively minor character, which makes it all the more worthy of featured status. -- SmokeDetector47 00:53, 16 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Supported Tyrant 19:19, 21 Feb 2005 (GMT)Tyrant
  • Emissary. Extensive and well sorted information on the Emissary of the Prophets. Good work. --BlueMars 18:21, Dec 24, 2004 (CET)
    • Supported. --Gvsualan 01:08, 13 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Supported. I see no reason why this shouldn't be a featured article, it's a very good write-up of all we know about the Emissary. Perhaps an image from What You Leave Behind can be included, when Sisko meets the Prophets? Ottens 16:29, 15 Feb 2005 (GMT)
  • Call to Arms - I know I wrote but I think its a good page with excellent pictures-Rebelstrike2005 20:56, 14 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • An extended write-up of the episode, with good use made of existing images. I see no reason why this one shouldn't be featured. Ottens 18:15, 16 Feb 2005 (GMT)
      • Supported. I agree-Excelsior 11:07, 17 Feb 2005 (GMT)

Can I add Call to Arms to the featured articles now?Rebelstrike2005 20:45, 23 Feb 2005 (GMT)

  • Equinox, Part I and Equinox, Part II. Self-nomination, just added all details to this episode which I can think of. A few dead links at the moment, but I'm working on them -- MiChaos 19:09, 7 Nov 2004 (CET).
    • Supported, but like Parallels, needs some pictures... Of course, thats not a reason to seriously object, but a suggestion. Ottens 19:20, 8 Nov 2004 (CET)
    • Supported Is this down here for a reason? Tyrant 19:26, 21 Feb 2005 (GMT)Tyrant

Nominations with objections

  • Federation-Cardassian War. Self-Nominated. Think I've got all references to this conflict. 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 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. -- Michael Warren | 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. 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. 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. Suggestions? Tyrant 20:39, 23 Feb 2005 (GMT)Tyrant
  • Cloaking device; Excellently written article, makes good use of images. Makes superb usage of available information, as well as duly noting inconsistancies. | THOR 23:24, 13 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • I don't seem to miss any information. Good references, nice accompanying pictures, extensive write-up. Ottens 16:27, 15 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Supported Tyrant 17:10, 15 Feb 2005 (GMT)Tyrant
    • Supported - All the important points are there. Solid effort! -- Balok 18:36, 15 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Support. -- SmokeDetector47 00:53, 16 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Needs More. A few things come to mind that are missing, upon further review, such as references about chronitons, and a passing reference to "Past Tense, Part I". Also, "The Die is Cast", "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield", "When the Bough Breaks" and "The Emissary" all contain useful references, or at the least, unexplored references to cloaks.--Gvsualan 17:48, 18 Feb 2005 (EST)
      • What does "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" say about cloaks? There is an invisible budget-saving ship, but it does not use a cloak. The info on that is already at stealth, where it belongs. As for the others, I either haven't seen them ("Emissary", "Bough Breaks") or don't recall any relevance ("Past Tense" and "Die is Cast"). -- Steve 21:01, 23 Feb 2005 (GMT)
  • Leonard H. McCoy -- Very well written with many source references with no glaring or obvious omissions; good use of image inclusion. Appreciative apocrypha inclusion with appropriate formatting. | THOR 19:21, 8 Feb 2005 (CET)
Unfortunately I disagree at the moment. For one I believe an article needs to be 95-100% complete before it is nominated and, for certain, featured. This, in my opinion is maybe only at 80%. I have contributed an immense amount of material to the article and it is still not completed to what I think is required for McCoy. I've "hidden" (ie. <!--- --->) a number of things in the edit portion of the article that I still wish to see in the article, just haven't had the time or DVD sources to add it. But, in short, there is virtually ZERO movie data in the article, just generic summaries, definately not enough to call it "complete". --Gvsualan 19:50, 8 Feb 2005 (CET)
Very well written, but agree with Gvsualan. Needs to be all-complete before being featured... Ottens 23:42, 12 Feb 2005 (GMT)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.