SandyGeorgia (talk | contribs) Added per discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates#Drive-by_nominations |
SandyGeorgia (talk | contribs) shorten, this is causing confusion |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at [[Wikipedia:Peer review]] or the [[WP:LOCE|League of Copyeditors]]. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the FAC process. Nominators who are not [http://vs.aka-online.de/wppagehiststat/ significant contributors to the article] should consult regular editors of the article prior to nomination. |
Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at [[Wikipedia:Peer review]] or the [[WP:LOCE|League of Copyeditors]]. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the FAC process. Nominators who are not [http://vs.aka-online.de/wppagehiststat/ significant contributors to the article] should consult regular editors of the article prior to nomination. |
||
Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly. An article should not be on [[WP:FAC|Featured article candidates]] and [[WP:PR|Peer review]] or [[WP:GAN|Good article nominations]] at the same time. Users should not add a second FA nomination until the first has gained support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed. Please do not split FA candidate pages into subsections using [[Help:Section|header code]] |
Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly. An article should not be on [[WP:FAC|Featured article candidates]] and [[WP:PR|Peer review]] or [[WP:GAN|Good article nominations]] at the same time. Users should not add a second FA nomination until the first has gained support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed. Please do not split FA candidate pages into subsections using [[Help:Section|header code]] (if necessary, use bolded headings). |
||
For a nomination to be [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log#Full current month log|promoted]] to FA status, [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the FA director, currently [[User:Raul654|Raul654]], determines whether there is consensus. (References in these instructions to "the director" include Raul654's nominated delegates.) If, after sufficient time, objections considered actionable by the director have not been resolved or consensus for promotion has not been reached, a nomination will be removed from the list and [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations|archived]]. The director determines the timing of the process for each nomination. |
For a nomination to be [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log#Full current month log|promoted]] to FA status, [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the FA director, currently [[User:Raul654|Raul654]], determines whether there is consensus. (References in these instructions to "the director" include Raul654's nominated delegates.) If, after sufficient time, objections considered actionable by the director have not been resolved or consensus for promotion has not been reached, a nomination will be removed from the list and [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations|archived]]. The director determines the timing of the process for each nomination. |
Revision as of 23:19, 9 April 2008
Here, we determine which articles are to be featured articles (FAs). FAs exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and meet the FA criteria.
Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at Wikipedia:Peer review or the League of Copyeditors. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the FAC process. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article prior to nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly. An article should not be on Featured article candidates and Peer review or Good article nominations at the same time. Users should not add a second FA nomination until the first has gained support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed. Please do not split FA candidate pages into subsections using header code (if necessary, use bolded headings). For a nomination to be promoted to FA status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the FA director, currently Raul654, determines whether there is consensus. (References in these instructions to "the director" include Raul654's nominated delegates.) If, after sufficient time, objections considered actionable by the director have not been resolved or consensus for promotion has not been reached, a nomination will be removed from the list and archived. The director determines the timing of the process for each nomination. A bot will update the article talk page after the article is promoted or the nomination archived. – |
Featured article candidates (FAC) Today's featured article (TFA):
Featured article tools:
Toolbox
|
Nomination procedure
Supporting and objecting Please read a nominated article fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.
|