Wikipedia:Good article criteria: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Lincher (talk | contribs)
→‎Length: change number to reflect current state
→‎What is a good article?: returning wording to previous version; there is no consensus for this change.
Line 15: Line 15:
2. It is '''factually accurate''' and '''[[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]]'''. In this respect:
2. It is '''factually accurate''' and '''[[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]]'''. In this respect:
::(a) it provides references to any and all sources used for its material;
::(a) it provides references to any and all sources used for its material;
::(b) the [[WP:CITE|citation]] of its sources is essential, and the use of [[Wikipedia:Inline Citation|inline citations]] mandatory;
::(b) the [[WP:CITE|citation]] of its sources is essential, and the use of [[Wikipedia:Inline Citation|inline citations]] is desirable, although not mandatory;
::(c) sources should be selected in accordance with the guidelines for [[WP:RS|reliable sources]];
::(c) sources should be selected in accordance with the guidelines for [[WP:RS|reliable sources]];
::(d) it contains no elements of [[WP:NOR|original research]].
::(d) it contains no elements of [[WP:NOR|original research]].

Revision as of 17:36, 14 September 2006

Shortcut:
WP:WIAGA

What is a good article?

A good article has the following attributes.

1. It is well written. In this respect:

(a) it has compelling prose, and is readily comprehensible to non-specialist readers;
(b) it follows a logical structure, introducing the topic and then grouping together its coverage of related aspects; where appropriate, it contains a succinct lead section summarising the topic, and the remaining text is organised into a system of hierarchical sections (particularly for longer articles);
(c) it follows the Wikipedia Manual of Style including the list guideline;
(d) necessary technical terms or jargon are briefly explained in the article itself, or an active link is provided.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable. In this respect:

(a) it provides references to any and all sources used for its material;
(b) the citation of its sources is essential, and the use of inline citations is desirable, although not mandatory;
(c) sources should be selected in accordance with the guidelines for reliable sources;
(d) it contains no elements of original research.

3. It is broad in its coverage. In this respect :

(a) it addresses all major aspects of the topic (this requirement is slightly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required by WP:FAC, and allows shorter articles and broad overviews of large topics to be listed);
(b) it stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary details (no non-notable trivia).

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy. In this respect:

(a) viewpoints are represented fairly and without bias;
(b) all significant points of view are fairly presented, but not asserted, particularly where there are or have been conflicting views on the topic.

5. It is stable, i.e. it does not change significantly from day to day and is not the subject of ongoing edit wars. This does not apply to vandalism and protection or semi-protection as a result of vandalism, or proposals to split/merge the article content.

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic. In this respect:

(a) the images are tagged and have succinct and descriptive captions;
(b) a lack of images does not in itself prevent an article from achieving Good Article status.

Good vs. featured articles

These criteria are very similar to the criteria for featured articles. However these criteria and the good article review process are designed primarily with short articles (25kb or less) in mind. For short articles, prose is less likely to reach the 'brilliant' standards required of featured articles, and inline referencing is not as important. Long articles which meet the GA criteria should also more or less meet the FA criteria.

Length

A good article may be of any length, as long as it properly addresses all major aspects of the topic. However, the authors of very short articles might consider whether it is more appropriate to merge them into larger articles. For articles longer than about 25Kb, rigorous reviewing of the Wikipedia peer review and featured article candidates guidelines is generally more appropriate than the process here.

Articles dealing with fiction

Articles dealing with fiction should follow the guidelines for writing about fiction. In short, articles dealing with fictional subjects, characters, objects, or locations, must establish and discuss significance outside the "fictional universe", together with the 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.

Lists

Recent discussions seem to indicate that lists are not going to be accepted into the GA system for the time being. Consider nominating lists for Wikipedia:Featured lists instead.