CJLL Wright (talk | contribs) m →Peer review: link to WP:PR |
CJLL Wright (talk | contribs) →What is a good article?: some revision |
||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
A [[WP:GA|good article]] has the following attributes: |
A [[WP:GA|good article]] has the following attributes: |
||
* It is '''well written''': |
|||
* It is '''well written''' - it has compelling prose, comprehensible to an intelligent layman, with any jargon accompanied by a short description in plain words; and structured with a [[WP:LEAD|lead section]] and a proper system of hierarchical headings. |
|||
** it has compelling prose, and is readily comprehensible to a non-specialist reader; |
|||
** where technical terms or necessary jargon appear they are briefly explained in the article itself (or, at the very least an active link is provided); |
|||
** it is appropriately structured with a [[WP:LEAD|lead section]] and a proper system of hierarchical headings. |
|||
* It is '''factually accurate''' with multiple '''references''' - its content should be [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]] with good quality sources [[WP:CITE|cited]]. Although citing of sources is essential, [[Wikipedia:Inline Citation|inline citations]] are not mandatory. |
* It is '''factually accurate''' with multiple '''references''' - its content should be [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]] with good quality sources [[WP:CITE|cited]]. Although citing of sources is essential, [[Wikipedia:Inline Citation|inline citations]] are not mandatory. |
||
* It is '''broad''' - it covers all major aspects of a topic. This requirement is slightly weaker than the ''comprehensiveness'' required by [[WP:FAC]] and allows shorter articles and very broad overviews of large topics to be listed as good. |
* It is '''broad''' - it covers all major aspects of a topic. This requirement is slightly weaker than the ''comprehensiveness'' required by [[WP:FAC]] and allows shorter articles and very broad overviews of large topics to be listed as good. |
Revision as of 02:52, 6 April 2006
What is a good article?
A good article has the following attributes:
- It is well written:
- it has compelling prose, and is readily comprehensible to a non-specialist reader;
- where technical terms or necessary jargon appear they are briefly explained in the article itself (or, at the very least an active link is provided);
- it is appropriately structured with a lead section and a proper system of hierarchical headings.
- It is factually accurate with multiple references - its content should be verifiable with good quality sources cited. Although citing of sources is essential, inline citations are not mandatory.
- It is broad - it covers all major aspects of a topic. This requirement is slightly weaker than the comprehensiveness required by WP:FAC and allows shorter articles and very broad overviews of large topics to be listed as good.
- It uses a neutral point of view - it is uncontroversial in its neutrality and factual accuracy;
- It is stable - it does not change significantly from day to day and is not the subject of ongoing edit wars.
- Wherever possible, it contains images to illustrate it. The images will all be appropriately tagged and will have short and descriptive captions. Lack of images does not prevent an article being good.
Length of good articles
A good article may be any length. However, for very short articles authors might consider whether it is more appropriate to merge the article into a large topic, while for substantial articles (20Kb+), the more rigorous reviewing of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates is probably more appropriate than the process here which works best with shorter articles.
Articles dealing with fiction
For articles dealing with fictional subjects, characters, objects, or locations, significance outside of the "fictional universe" must be established and discussed, together with its process of authorship. The focus of the article should remain on discussing the subject as fiction within the context of "our" universe, not on establishing it as a "real" topic in a fictional universe; otherwise the article may be better placed in one of the many fictional-universe specific wikis.
Peer review
Peer reviews help to speed up the nomination process as it tells us that the article has already had a thorough review. This is usually important for larger articles that meet the criteria.