Wikipedia:Good article nominations: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 15:20, 24 August 2006

Shortcut

[[:|WP:GA/N
WP:GAN
WP:GAC]]

Good article candidates

Wikipedia:Good articles is a list of articles containing excellent content, but which are unlikely to be suitable featured articles - primarily because they are not very long. The system is unbureaucratic: everyone can nominate good articles, and anyone who has not significantly contributed to an article can review it. This list is for proposing possible promotion of articles to the community for consideration. (Consider joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles if you are doing lots of reviewing!)

How to nominate a page

If you believe an article to be good according to the 'Good Article' criteria:

List the article at the bottom of the relevant section below using the syntax: # {{article|Article Name}} ~~~~ with an edit summary of "Nominating [[Article Name]]"
If the article is longer than 32kb, add '''LONG''' to it.
Add {{GAnominee|3 November 2024}} to the nominated article's talk page.

When you nominate an article, please consider also choosing another article from the list to review.

How to identify long articles

To determine if an article is longer than 32kb, go to the article and click the edit tab at the top of the screen. Articles longer than 32kb will display a length warning above the edit box; shorter articles will not.

Nomination categories

Philosophy and religion

Social sciences

Technology

Miscellaneous nominations

How to review an article

The process for reviewing an article is:

Choose an article to review, noting:
- You cannot choose an article you've significantly contributed to.
- Nominations near the top of the lists are oldest, and should be given higher priority.
Read the whole article, and decide whether it should pass or fail based on the criteria below.

Review carefully—the standards of good articles are only as high as those of the most lenient reviewer!

Pass

If you feel the article meets the 'Good Article' criteria:

Remove it from the list using the edit summary "Passed [[Article Name]]"
Replace {{GAnominee}} with {{GA}} on the article's talk page, and leave a comment about passing the article (with suggestions, if you can). To indicate the reviewed version of a Good Article, use {{GA|oldid=nnnnnn}} on the talk page (replacing nnnnn with the id number of the reviewed version) rather than just {{GA}}.
List the article on Wikipedia:Good articles under the appropriate section and update the article count at the end of the section.

Fail

If you feel the article does not meet the 'Good Article' criteria:

Remove it from the list using the edit summary "Failed [[Article Name]]"
Replace {{GAnominee}} with {{FailedGA|3 November 2024}} on its talk page.
State which criteria it failed to meet on the article's talk page. Be specific if you can. The template {{FGAN}} may help you organize the critique. (The syntax can be found there).
If your sole criterion for rejecting the article was a lack of appropriate references, please add the article to the Unreferenced GA Nominations list.

On Hold

You may put an article On Hold for up to 7 days if only minor changes or clarifications are needed. If the 7 days expire without the nominator addressing the concern, the article can be failed. To put an article on hold, copy and paste the following below the nomination entry:

#::{{GAOnHold}} - Notes left on talk page. --~~~~

or

#::'''On Hold''' - Notes left on talk page. --~~~~

Nominations

@@ Line 191: / Line 191: @@
 # {{article|Western Sahara}} [[User:SeanMack|SeanMack]] 05:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 # {{article|Denver, Colorado}} Good article! [[User:Judgesurreal777|Judgesurreal777]] 06:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
+# {{article|St Buryan}} [[User:Steinsky|Joe D]] [[User talk:Steinsky|(t)]] 15:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 <!--
 Please add your article to the bottom of the list above in the following format: