Amp Suit[]
Aww...Amp suit is gonna lose again. Nobody appreciates raw and sophisticated power anymore.[TECTONIUM] 01:51, March 24, 2010 (UTC)
Great leo won so it gets the spot for april, I dont know how exactly Matias sets it up so Im leaving it off until then. in the mean time Ill remove the Leo and people can vote for others. Im still showing the love for the AMP suit Tectonium :) JayBO Talk IRC Videos 17:47, April 4, 2010 (UTC)
Hmmmm...Grace is the other choice now. I'm actually quite torn here, both of their articles are very well written.[TECTONIUM] 22:27, April 5, 2010 (UTC)
Awww...Its gonna get creamed AGAIN.[TECTONIUM] 19:33, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
Wording of Criteria[]
Just in case someone doesn't know what succinct means;
- Characterized by clear, precise expression in few words (The Free Online Dictionary)
The Assault on the Tree of Souls[]
This article has been featured last month, so it is ineligible this time. --((((Matias)))) ~ Talk IRC 12:16, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
Article candidates[]
Last month we had a total of one article that was nominated for the position of featured article. Now the pattern seems to repeat itself at least for the moment. Imo it seems kinda redundant that we vote which of the one nominated articles is going to be elected =P. It's not much of an election if one article has a head start (like now the Avatar Program already has four votes) while the other (if one is ever nominated) has to start from zero (and has a shorter period of time to gather votes). My suggestion is that either appoint a person who selects the next months article nominations in advance or make it a rule that the person who casts the first vote of the month (and probably at this situation has nominated one article) selects two articles for the month. Thoughts? --LuckyMan 07:18, August 3, 2010 (UTC)
- Valid point; I second the opinion that one article for nomination is pointless. Well I'll quickly suggest that, instead of putting the article in straight away to be voted for, perhaps let it simmer until another article is nominated. i.e. in a separate section (somewhere relevant) the future proposed featured article could be noted, then acted upon when another article in nominated. < Disadvantage is, is that another article may not be chosen by the time that an article is required. If it was made aricle that the first nominator must find another article, the chance may arise that he/she might just choose any article that comes into their head - but that does not necessarily merit. --IWantheUltimateChange 07:51, August 3, 2010 (UTC)
- Or let people add candidates for the first 2 weeks of the month and vote for them for the rest of the month. Faern. 3D-HD-Pics 15:40, August 3, 2010 (UTC)
- Good point. Well, I would say that the first person to nominate an article should nominate two, or let the first week of the month be for nominating. =i==i= Drαgιηflι τhε Lμmιηεsςεητ =i==i= 16:35, August 3, 2010 (UTC)
- I also suggest to not put an image from the article on the voting page. This may cause people to vote for an article because of the image which is obviously not the point of the voting. I think a simple link to the candidate article is sufficient. Faern. 3D-HD-Pics 18:52, August 4, 2010 (UTC)
- I agree. But regarding the original topic, should we try that two week nomination period in next month? --LuckyMan 19:05, August 4, 2010 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. =i==i= Drαgιηflι τhε Lμmιηεsςεητ =i==i= 03:29, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I agree that should be trialled next month. For this month, obviously the current article will be nominated if there is no present challenger. Removing the picture is a really good idea as well, for the reason stated. --IWantheUltimateChange 11:54, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. =i==i= Drαgιηflι τhε Lμmιηεsςεητ =i==i= 03:29, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
Is there a list of featured articles anywhere? --Cadellin 12:01, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
- If you mean a list of past featured articles, there isn't, but you can check them in the history of the featured article template and the history of the main page for the time before the template existed.
- Didn't we agree that there should not be images in that section? Should I remove them? --((((Matias)))) ~ Talk IRC 21:14, August 6, 2010 (UTC)
- That we did, fire away. --LuckyMan 21:21, August 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, done. I changed some things as well. --((((Matias)))) ~ Talk IRC 21:26, August 6, 2010 (UTC)