Archives |
---|
|
Threads older than 21 days may be archived by MiszaBot. |
Contents |
UK Singles Chart topic?
It has suddenly struck me that the lists of number ones on the UK Singles Charts from the 1950s to the 2000s are all featured. If we could hypothetically get the UK Singles Chart article up to GA status, would this make for a potential featured topic? I ask because I have absolutely no experience in FT area. It'd look something like this:
7 articles
UK Singles Chart |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
There are similar lists relating to Christmas number ones and Posthumous number ones on the chart that are also featured - could these be included as well? Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 19:07, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- In that situation, the main topic would be List of UK Singles Chart number ones, rather than just UK Singles Chart. Once that's an FL though then it seems like a solid topic to me. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:13, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Dang, I don't think that article ever really could be a FL - it's basically just a list of lists. Might be something to think about though. Thanks very much. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 19:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Lists of lists are often grand for featured status—several Featured Topics lead with a list of lists, so have a good poke around for some of those to get a feel for how one would be best done. GRAPPLE X 19:47, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- This one, for example. GRAPPLE X 19:56, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Hmm... You know, you've actually given me an idea now. Cheers, Grapple X! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 23:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- This one, for example. GRAPPLE X 19:56, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Lists of lists are often grand for featured status—several Featured Topics lead with a list of lists, so have a good poke around for some of those to get a feel for how one would be best done. GRAPPLE X 19:47, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Dang, I don't think that article ever really could be a FL - it's basically just a list of lists. Might be something to think about though. Thanks very much. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 19:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
FYI this was originally my plan. I got the remaining lists to FL and I had started to improve UK Singles Chart with a view to completing the topic. I managed the first two and a half sections of the History, the Broadcasting, Records and alternative charts done but I never finished the History and hadn't checked the Criteria for inclusion (some of their development is included in History). I also think List of UK charts and number-one singles (1952–1969), which I created, should probably be included as there was no pre-1969 UK Singles Chart. There might be stuff in my userspace of use but I won't be doing much in the near future and am probably considered inactive. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 23:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Question
If I have promoted 10 out of 11 articles within a topic to GA, can I still nominate for Good Topic? Calvin • Watch n' Learn 01:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
- Yes of course you can, just let the remaining article's promoter know about your nomination. — Legolas (talk2me) 07:11, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
- Okay. Thanks. Calvin • Watch n' Learn 01:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- It would depend for the reason the 11th topic isn't a GA yet. If it's waiting at GAN or can't be one for whatever reason, it's fine. If it just hasn't been worked on yet, that'd be a problem. I imagine the situation is the former though. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:43, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
- Okay. Thanks. Calvin • Watch n' Learn 01:55, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Multiple nominations
Are multiple nominations allowed at GTC? I can't see anything permitting or forbidding it, but I might have overlooked something. I ask because I'm one GAN away from having a topic candidate ready, and still have one on the nominations page. The next (and any subsequent) GTC I put forth will count towards the 2012 Wikicup so I'd rather not find out the hard way that multiple noms are disallowed, but I'd also not want to play it safe and wait for this first one to finally wrap up if it turned out not to be necessary. GRAPPLE X 02:41, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
- Multiple noms are fine. I'll try and find some time to close a few this weekend, my edits are next to nil this month alas. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:44, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Help?
Hi, I was wondering if I could get some help here. This nomination was initiated in November. Since then, it has gotten all supports. What is taking this one so long? I realize there is a bit of a back log, but... TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 02:32, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'll close what I can today and thursday (would have done it wednesday but can't now). Unfortunately all three of us are dropping the ball on the backlog, definitely too many noms. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 17:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Backlog
I hate to sound like a dick, but is this process moving any more? There are nominations approaching three months old with no noted problems, including one with seven supports; while there's also a stale nomination with multiple opposes and no serious attempts at fixing the issues. At the very least, passing and failing those two might help things move along, but things definitely seem to need a toe in the backside here. Is an additional set of hands required (I know that promoting a topic does require a fair heft of grunt work)? GRAPPLE X 23:57, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm willing to do it, but I'm not sure what to do. I know a lot about the FT process, so I can help more if someone helps me out. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:14, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- There are 3 delegates that are supposed to take care of this. The problem is that the promotion procedure listed at Wikipedia:Featured_topic_candidates/Nomination_procedure#Promotion_procedure are fairly complicated and people outside delegates that have done promotions have skipped some of the steps. If you guys do it just make sure you go through all the steps. Nergaal (talk) 21:38, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- I guess the question is why aren't these 3 delegates taking care of this. If there are obvious cases where topics should have been promoted by now (like the ones cited above), I see no problem in another editor stepping up and taking care of it if they can follow all the steps to do the promotion correctly. Rreagan007 (talk) 02:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm comfortable taking the necessary caution to follow all of the steps of the procedure, but I'd not be comfortable actually promoting/rejecting without the involvement of one of the delegates. If one of them wanted to simply sign off on any of the nominations (the two listed above are the most clear-cut so would be a good start) then I'd be glad to pitch in with the rest of the steps. GRAPPLE X 14:27, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- Most nominations are usually pretty clear cut, and either meet the criteria or not. If a nomination has been open for at least a month and has nothing but supports it should probably just be promoted. There is really no need to drag out a nomination longer than that unless there is some problem that has been brought up. Rreagan007 (talk) 15:19, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- There are indeed a good number of those topics that can be closed immediately. Unfortunately the only reason I haven't yet is an utter lack of time on the site; each topic takes a good while to close and I haven't even had a 30 minute block free to put aside in weeks. If one of you guys want to close one of those bottom two you're more than welcome to, and I can clean up anything that went wrong. There's a lot of steps but if you do all of them then it's hard to mess it up. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:02, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
- Most nominations are usually pretty clear cut, and either meet the criteria or not. If a nomination has been open for at least a month and has nothing but supports it should probably just be promoted. There is really no need to drag out a nomination longer than that unless there is some problem that has been brought up. Rreagan007 (talk) 15:19, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm comfortable taking the necessary caution to follow all of the steps of the procedure, but I'd not be comfortable actually promoting/rejecting without the involvement of one of the delegates. If one of them wanted to simply sign off on any of the nominations (the two listed above are the most clear-cut so would be a good start) then I'd be glad to pitch in with the rest of the steps. GRAPPLE X 14:27, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- I guess the question is why aren't these 3 delegates taking care of this. If there are obvious cases where topics should have been promoted by now (like the ones cited above), I see no problem in another editor stepping up and taking care of it if they can follow all the steps to do the promotion correctly. Rreagan007 (talk) 02:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- Isn't it possible to request a bot to do all of those steps, similarly to how FLCs and FACs are closed these days? Nergaal (talk) 22:18, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
- I imagine a bot could update the article history template provided it had something to work with at first—if all articles in a topic nomination used a nom template on their talk pages, it would probably be quite simple to have a bot automate that whole step. The rest of it's pretty quickly done by hand though, dunno if that would benefit from automation or not. Iunno. GRAPPLE X 22:22, 17 April 2012 (UTC)