Featured and good topics in Wikipedia A featured topic is a collection of inter-related articles that are of a good quality (though are not necessarily featured articles).A good topic is a collection of inter-related articles that are of a good quality (though are not necessarily featured articles) with a less stringent quality threshold than a featured topic. This page is for the nomination of potential featured and good topics. See the featured and good topic criteria for criteria on both types of topic. If you would like to ask any questions about your topic and the featured/good topic process before submitting it, visit Wikipedia talk:Featured and good topic candidates. Before nominating a topic, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at Featured and good topic questions. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the FTC/GTC process. If you nominate something you have worked on, note it as a self-nomination. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the articles of the topic should consult regular editors of the articles prior to nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly. The featured and good topics director, GamerPro64, or his delegates Aza24 and Bryan Rutherford, determine the timing of the process for each nomination. For a nomination to be promoted to FT or GT status, consensus must be reached for a group to be promoted to featured or good topic status. If enough time passes without objections being resolved, nominations will be removed from the candidates topic and archived. To contact the FTC director and delegates, please leave a message on the FTC talk page, or use the {{@FTC}} notification template elsewhere. You may want to check previous archived nominations first: |
Good content: Featured and good topic tools: |
Nomination procedureTo create a new nomination use the form below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Saffron/archive1) and click the "Create new nomination" button. Once the nomination page is created, remember to transclude it in the appropriate section below, to leave nomination templates on the talk pages of the articles nominated for the topic. For detailed instructions on how to nominate topics or add articles to existing topics, see Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Nomination procedure. Supporting and objectingPlease review all the articles of the nominated topic with the featured and good topic criteria in mind before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.
For a topic to be promoted to featured or good topic status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. If enough time passes without objections being resolved (at least one week), nominations will be removed from the candidates list and archived. Nominations will stay here for ten days if there is unanimous consent, or longer if warranted by debate. |
Featured topic nominations
Overview of Judy Ann Santos
Judy Ann Santos (born 1978) is a Filipino actress and film producer. The recipient of various accolades, she is known for her portrayals of oppressed and impoverished women. She made her screen debut in 1986 with a supporting role in the drama series Kaming Mga Ulila. At the age of 10, Santos made her breakthrough as the eponymous character in the children's television series Ula, Ang Batang Gubat (1988). She achieved wider recognition when she played the titular roles in the drama series Mara Clara (1992) and Esperanza (1997). She won the Gawad Urian for Best Actress for playing a woman with dissociative identity disorder in the psychological drama Sabel (2004). She then starred in the comedy drama Kasal, Kasali, Kasalo (2006), for which she received the FAMAS, Golden Screen, Luna, Metro Manila Film Festival, and Star Award for Best Actress. She co-produced the independent film Ploning (2008) and starred in the war drama Mindanao (2019). Both films were submissions for Best International Feature Film at the 81st and 93rd Academy Awards, respectively. The latter earned her a Cairo International Film Festival Award for Best Actress.
| discuss 3 articles Judy Ann Santos
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
- Contributor(s): Pseud 14
This is an overview of the career and achievements of Filipino actress Judy Ann Santos. I started working on this project at the start of the year and with all relevant articles now promoted to featured status, I believe this now meets WP:FT criteria. Happy to address your comments and thanks to all who take the time to review. --Pseud 14 (talk) 01:45, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support FrB.TG (talk) 10:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support: Looks like all the typical pieces for an actor topic. Good work! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 13:33, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:29, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I have my doubts about the usage of People's Journal in all of these articles since it is apparently a far-right publication and outside of that however, this is a collection of well-researched articles covered by strong sources! --K. Peake 07:57, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Solar system
The Solar System is a gravitationally bound system consisting of the Sun and the celestial bodies that orbit it. After the Sun, the largets objects in the Solar system are the eight planets, consiting of the four gas and ice giants as well as the four terrestrial planets. Many of the planets and larger dwarf planets in the Solar System also have moons of their own. The sun is orbited by several belts of small Solar System bodies: the asteroid belt between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter, the Kuiper belt just beyond the orbit of Neptune, and possibly the Oort cloud in the outer reaches of the Solar System. The entire system was formed roughly 4.6 billion years ago from the remnants of the Sun's molecular cloud, and the hydrogen and helium that was present in this cloud constitutes much of the Solar System's mass.
| discuss 19 articles Solar System
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
- Contributor(s): Mover of molehills, Praemonitus, too many others to count!
I just finished a lengthy review for Jupiter, which was the last Solar system-related article that was not FA. I think that the Wikipedia community has done a great job getting so many of these articles to featured status. --Mover of molehills (talk) 18:51, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Comments: In case this isn't clear, the Solar System is a Former Featured Topic, and this nomination is leaving out a number of articles that were in the topic's previous incarnation. Probably those should be included in this re-nomination? Jupiter is also itself a Former Featured Topic that should be able to be renominated now that the main article is back to GA. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 19:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)- Indeed, this nomination should presumably be a renomination of Wikipedia:Featured topics/Solar System. Mover of molehills, are you genuinely proposing a new scope for this topic, or were you unaware of the former topic, Wikipedia:Featured topics/Solar System? Aza24 (talk) 23:30, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Aza24: I was unaware, sorry. Should we move it over? Mover of molehills (talk) 00:36, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- So, this nomination is still leaving out Scattered disc, Dwarf planet, and Formation and evolution of the Solar System. The last one, at least, I can't see not having in this topic. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 13:37, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've put in the first and third articles. I don't see why Dwarf planet should be in there because we have not included Planet - I envisioned this category as more of a list of specific objects and entities in the Solar System, not a glossary of terms. Mover of molehills (talk) 15:36, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- I guess I can support this proposal now, though the scope seems a bit arbitrary. Good work to all who improved the articles! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed, this nomination should presumably be a renomination of Wikipedia:Featured topics/Solar System. Mover of molehills, are you genuinely proposing a new scope for this topic, or were you unaware of the former topic, Wikipedia:Featured topics/Solar System? Aza24 (talk) 23:30, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- Query: why is Pluto there? If dwarf planets are to be included the topic is missing quite a few. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:04, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- I just added the extra dwarf planets found in the original FT nomination to round the proposal out! Mover of molehills (talk) 20:32, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- Haumea and Makemake are excluded while Ceres and Eris are included because ... ? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:40, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- Perhaps because of the extensive scientific study the later objects have undergone? Notability isn't necessarily about size, although it helps. Praemonitus (talk) 21:15, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- I chose to include some of the most well-known dwarf planets - obviously, there is no way that we can include every interesting article in the Solar System within this topic. However, I'd be happy to include Haumea and/or Makemake if there is widespread consensus for it, considering that these are both featured articles. Mover of molehills (talk) 21:22, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- Before we go for consensus, let's check the facts. None of the four are nailed on as DPs, although Ceres is getting pretty close. It was a genuine question as to where and why you are drawing the line. And I would be interested whether the scholarly consensus agrees with whatever you suggest. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:27, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by "None of the four are nailed on as DPs" - as far as I can tell, all of them have been officially designated as such by the IAU. To be honest, it doesn't matter very much to me which ones are designated as part of this topic, considering that all of the articles we are discussing are FAs. I suppose it seems reasonable to list the five bodies officially recognized as dwarf planets (Pluto, Eris, Ceres, Makemake and Haumea) and ignore all of the rest. Does that seem like a good idea? Mover of molehills (talk) 23:15, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- The last I heard, Makemake and Haumea were provisional DPs for naming purposes only. Their full DP status was undecided. It is possible that my information is not up to date. Apologies if I am either not being clear and/or am coming across as awkward, but what are the criteria for inclusion in the topic? So it can be updated if new objects meeting them are recognised (eg 10 Hygiea, 704 Interamnia, Sedna, Gonggong, Quaoar, Orcus, or Salacia) - by whatever body or consensus you lay out in those criteria - or, possibly, de-recognised (eg if Eris turned out on closer examination not to be in hydrostatic equilibrium). Such as, if my information is still accurate, Makemake or Haumea once the IAU finally decide their status. (Assuming that you go with IAU recognition.) Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 00:27, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- From what I have read, there are only 5 at the mooment that have been officially recognized by the IAU. I have now added all of them to the topic. My idea for what should be part of the "Solar system" topic was the Sun, all planets, all officially recognized dwarf planets, and the three major belts of small Solar System bodies. It may be that there will be an unwieldy number of dwarf planets recognized in coming years, so we should just leave them out entirely - I just feel uncomfortable excluding Pluto, since it's such a cultural icon.
- For now, I have included Makemake and Haumea in the topic. Let me know what you think of this. Mover of molehills (talk) 01:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ok. "... and dwarf planets recognised as such by the IAU, including provisionally and/or for naming purposes" would seem to complete a sensible set. It may be worth adding this clause to the opening description.
- The last I heard, Makemake and Haumea were provisional DPs for naming purposes only. Their full DP status was undecided. It is possible that my information is not up to date. Apologies if I am either not being clear and/or am coming across as awkward, but what are the criteria for inclusion in the topic? So it can be updated if new objects meeting them are recognised (eg 10 Hygiea, 704 Interamnia, Sedna, Gonggong, Quaoar, Orcus, or Salacia) - by whatever body or consensus you lay out in those criteria - or, possibly, de-recognised (eg if Eris turned out on closer examination not to be in hydrostatic equilibrium). Such as, if my information is still accurate, Makemake or Haumea once the IAU finally decide their status. (Assuming that you go with IAU recognition.) Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 00:27, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- Before we go for consensus, let's check the facts. None of the four are nailed on as DPs, although Ceres is getting pretty close. It was a genuine question as to where and why you are drawing the line. And I would be interested whether the scholarly consensus agrees with whatever you suggest. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:27, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- I chose to include some of the most well-known dwarf planets - obviously, there is no way that we can include every interesting article in the Solar System within this topic. However, I'd be happy to include Haumea and/or Makemake if there is widespread consensus for it, considering that these are both featured articles. Mover of molehills (talk) 21:22, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- Perhaps because of the extensive scientific study the later objects have undergone? Notability isn't necessarily about size, although it helps. Praemonitus (talk) 21:15, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- Haumea and Makemake are excluded while Ceres and Eris are included because ... ? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:40, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:33, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Fantastic topic, great work. NapHit (talk) 15:11, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support after carefully reading the comments. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 19:21, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support: I assume the old Jupiter featured topic will be back up for renomination soon? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:54, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- My one hesitation is that Jupiter in fiction is not good or featured, and it seems like a relevant part of the topic. After this one gets promoted, I think that the FT as a whole can go through. Mover of molehills (talk) 14:28, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Good topic nominations
Late Registration
Late Registration is the second studio album by American rapper Kanye West, released on August 30, 2005. The album saw West venture into an elaborate and orchestral style, which brought him widespread critical success. West was also successfully commercial with the album, reaching number one on the US Billboard 200 and releasing multiple hit singles, including the smash hit "Gold Digger".
| discuss 8 articles Late Registration
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
- Contributor(s): K. Peake, Bruce Campbell
I have worked very hard on these articles for the past few years, which began to see early results when "Touch the Sky" became a GA in December 2019 and I scored my most recent one with "Heard 'Em Say" in June 2022! Late Registration achieved this status before I was even an editor on here, however I tried to bring it to FA earlier in 2022 with extensive work but to no avail, though the album is of significant importance to potentially become a FA. --K. Peake 10:50, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose: I hate to be a downer, but it's typical for an album topic to include any supporting tours and live albums associated with the studio album, which, in this case, would mean Late Orchestration and, at some point, an article about the Touch The Sky Tour, once someone writes one. No disrespect to your work on all these articles! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 13:42, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Bryanrutherford0 The Touch The Sky Tour was not notable enough to have its own article created and is mentioned in the main article anyway. Also, Late Orchestration was released as late as 2006 and features songs from The College Dropout too. Therefore, these are not needed for the GT. --K. Peake 09:35, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comments: Amazing work on all these articles, including "Gone" and "Hey Mama" where you provided sources that make said articles pass WP:NSongs.
On "Hey Mama" after the sources you have this written there "The year of 2000 Kanye produced this song and enlisted Naki the Beatman producer 107.5 radio personality who brought Kanye Mysta Jay for vocals. Naki's vocal mate of r&b group Precyyse." → remove. On "Drive Slow" one archive error on source 33. Reference 16 shouldn't be Slant Magazine?In several articles, such as "Touch the Sky", you use "Vulture", always url-access=limited. DJ Booth is not a reliable source, according to Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources. On "Heard 'Em Say" can you replace sources 113 and 117? References 65, 66 and 68 are duplicated from the chart table. Source 77 is missing the author. I will add more later. On "Diamonds from Sierra Leone" amazon is referenced in one source but not on the other (22, 23 and 109), also not sure about the reliability of rocklist.net. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:40, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- MarioSoulTruthFan I have done all of your points, apart from the replacement of sources 113 and 117 because the GA criteria says dead links are allowed, removal of refs 65 and 68 since these are using a refname cited from the table so are not duplicates while ref 66 is needed separately for the specific chart issue and ref 77 already cites the author so you must've missed something. --K. Peake 09:35, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- The article I wanted to mention with those sources was "Touch the Sky", really sorry about it. On "Gold Digger" source 37 has both work and publisher, stick to one, and is Playlouder a reliable source?MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 10:05, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- MarioSoulTruthFan I have done all of your points, apart from the replacement of sources 113 and 117 because the GA criteria says dead links are allowed, removal of refs 65 and 68 since these are using a refname cited from the table so are not duplicates while ref 66 is needed separately for the specific chart issue and ref 77 already cites the author so you must've missed something. --K. Peake 09:35, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- I made those fixes for the song article now apart from the ref 77 one, as there is no author for that source. Also, ref 37 does not have any publisher and Playlouder is reliable due to having partnered with Glastonbury. --K. Peake 07:49, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
2019–20 snooker season
The professional events played during the 2019–20 snooker season
| discuss 31 articles 2019–20 snooker season
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
- Contributor(s): Lee Vilenski
All of the professional events that make up the season are here. There is also additional articles such as the main one, the rankings and X in cue sport lists (which can be removed if not suitable) Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:40, 22 May 2022 (UTC) --Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:40, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Just as a heads up, you have three dab links in the table: 2020 Championship League, 2020 European Masters and 2020 World Grand Prix. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 13:43, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. Changed Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose According to 2019–20 snooker season the following events were also part of the season: 2019 World Seniors Championship, 2019 UK Seniors Championship, 2020 World Seniors Championship, but none is GA or better. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:58, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Final Fantasy VIII (2nd supplementary nomination)
This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Final Fantasy VIII for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:
| discuss 7 articles Final Fantasy VIII
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
When these two character articles were created and taken to GA, it looks like another editor just added them to the topic box without ever running a formal supplementary proposal; so, I'm running that now. These seem to be major characters in the game and are GAs, so it looks to me like they do indeed belong. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 14:40, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comments There is overusage of the term "she" in the Selphie Tilmitt article rather than her identity and the overly short section can be merged with her appearances, also I am not sure about the reliability of FlareGamer,
Destructoid, GamesRevolution,WomensGamers.comand 1UP. Furthermore, ref formatting needs to be consistent for the order of last and first names in the article as well as archives or publishers. I have the same issues with Edea Kramer regarding the usage of some of those sources also in that article and the ref formatting, plus merge the third para of appearances with the second one. Besides these issues, I fully support the addition of these articles to the GT! --K. Peake 18:01, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- To be clear, I didn't work on any of these articles, and I'm not interested in doing so. They each passed at GAN, but if you feel that they need more work to merit that status, then hopefully someone will pick them up here in response to your comments. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 18:10, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- I can understand why Flaregamer and WomerGamers.com might not be reliable but I'm pretty sure Destructoid, GamesRevolution and 1UP are helpful reliable sources who always use sources for each article.Tintor2 (talk) 20:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- I take no issue with the last three sources then, but I am not willing to support this GT if the others are used and those problems persist whether you worked on the articles or not. --K. Peake 07:11, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hmm, what about Eyes on Me (Faye Wong song)? Is this not a suitable edition to this topic? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:07, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- I lean toward thinking that the presence of Music of Final Fantasy VIII covers that dimension of the topic sufficiently that the topic wouldn't need the song article, but I agree that it would be better to have it, since it seems to be the only notable "single" from the game. The song article apparently didn't exist when this topic was first promoted, so previous reviewers haven't considered it. If a consensus develops that it's needed, then this would need to be replaced by a topic removal proposal, unless and until someone took the song to GA. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with this. I do think the single is notable enough, and only used in this game, it probably should also appear on this topic. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:05, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- I lean toward thinking that the presence of Music of Final Fantasy VIII covers that dimension of the topic sufficiently that the topic wouldn't need the song article, but I agree that it would be better to have it, since it seems to be the only notable "single" from the game. The song article apparently didn't exist when this topic was first promoted, so previous reviewers haven't considered it. If a consensus develops that it's needed, then this would need to be replaced by a topic removal proposal, unless and until someone took the song to GA. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I'm not sure if the song meets the WP:NSongs guidelines as most of the sources available seem to come from unreliable third parties. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:53, 23 May 2022 (UTC)