Nominations without objections
- It has been awhile since I have done anything with this. I had opened a peer review on this almost 9 months ago, and have only received comments from a now banned user. I've written what I think to be a fairly complete summary, listed canon/non-canon characters, etc., all the jazz that I think makes our non-canon articles good. We even have that fun behind the scenes info on how the cover was created. --OuroborosCobra talk 15:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Nominations with objections
- Nomination proposed for SS uniforms and insignia. This article has been painstakingly researched to discuss, describe, and display every SS insignia and uniform seen in all series of Star Trek. Dark subject matter to be sure, but very comprehensive and worthy of featured article status. -FleetCaptain 22:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- I am honored by such support from this community. You guys are the best. -FleetCaptain 14:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Support. Good article, I really like the part that all ranks have an image displaying a character wearing the particular rank. Otherwise, a good article that greatly covers the subject in matter. Dark subject or not, this has appeared in Star Trek canon, therefore we wrote an article about it (well, mostly FleetCaptain). and now, some of us think this is a good example of bla bla bla, you know the drill ;-). -- Rom Ulan 22:57, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Support - Wow, for a uniform article that is meant to be like a list, this is well done! - Adm. Enzo Aquarius...I'm listening 04:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Support -- I felt bad uploading two or three insignia and then never having time to complete the analysis of the episodes in question, this collaboration has truly come full circle! Cheers! -- Captain MKB 04:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Support. I have to say, amazingly done. I especially love how all of the insignia have screenshots showing their use on-screen in addition to the graphic of the actually insignia. Excellent touch. We should be doing that with all of our uniform/rank articles, I think. --OuroborosCobra talk 05:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Support. What they said :P – Cleanse 11:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Support. The insignia for major could use a better image. Otherwise, outstanding article for all the above reasons. -- Connor Cabal 13:42, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, thats true. Trouble is the costume department apparently just made up a "major insignia" by taking the thiner Standartenfuhrer (Colonel) leaf and streching it out to look like the larger United States Major leaf. By all rights, the guy should have worn four pips, but the viewing audience would have releated more to a major wearing a "major's leaf" which is why they did it that way. -FleetCaptain 14:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Guess what! I just redid the Ekos Major insignia per your suggestion. It took some doing, but I made it clean and neat like the other insignia. Good suggestion, it looks much better. -FleetCaptain 14:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Comment. Has this article had a Peer Review? I proposed an article for Featured status some time ago and did not submit it for review first, though I understand that articles for Featured consideration should be. What is the difference between Peer Review and what we have done above? Should there be/has there been a streamling of the procedure? -- Connor Cabal 15:04, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- No peer review was conducted. I didnt see that as a pre-req for the FA nomination but might have missed. Given the support above, can we possibly waive such a requirement? -FleetCaptain 15:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- "Peer review" is not required for an FA nomination, AFAIK. The difference between them is that peer review is used to get help from the community doing final touch ups and perfection of an article, and an FA nomination claims that it is already at that "perfection" (of course there is no such thing) level. If you think that an article is already at that level without a peer review, then as far as I know (or care), nominate it for FA. --OuroborosCobra talk 15:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Minor oppose & Comment. Comment first: Peer Review can be requested independently of an FA nomination, and in most cases it is a good idea to do so because that moves some of the possible opposition to an earlier step. Without a separate Peer Review proces (which is entirely possible), the FA nomination will inevitably become such process... ;) Which leads me to my opposing vote: There isn't too much textual content in this article, but I already seem to be in an overwhelming minority regarding this. However, if an article consists of mostly images, at least those (and their layout) should be of best possible quality.
- Regarding images, I see some insignia images with dark or transparent background, while others have a relatively ugly white background/border. Some have a thin outline, others a thick one. Some of the insignia are slightly tilted/misaligned. The "Major" collor insignia has serious compression artifacts. It would be great if this could be fixed before this nomination went through. Eventually, I could even be of some help, if time allows on the weekend.
- Regarding layout, it would be nice if the tables would be aligned. We have one 4-column table, then two 3-column table, all with slightly different widths. Maybe the latter two could be combined into another 4-column table, set to the same width as the first one? -- Cid Highwind 15:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.