Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Failed log/2017
Evanescence (Evanescence album)[edit]
- Contributor(s): DANNYmusicEDITOR, My love is love
I think you'll all agree this is a good topic. In the event that I retire and the band does in fact get their asses back in the studio and make another proper studio album, and I'm not here to make another GA on them, I can say that this good topic will definitely stand the test of time. Perhaps one day I will get the other two albums this way too, only one of the articles related to them is particularly difficult. I am crediting My love is love for "What You Want", as they promoted it in 2014 before I had much experience. dannymusiceditor Speak up! 19:31, 14 August 2017 (UTC) --dannymusiceditor Speak up! 19:31, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: Wonderful work with all of the articles in this topic! My only concern is that I believe that Evanescence Tour would need to be promoted to the level of a good article and included in the topic for it to be considered completed. Please see the following topics to see how the related tour is included in the album topic: Wikipedia:Featured topics/Confessions on a Dance Floor, Wikipedia:Featured topics/The Fame, Wikipedia:Featured topics/In the Zone, and Wikipedia:Featured topics/Independiente (Ricardo Arjona album). Aoba47 (talk) 20:39, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, that's right, I didn't consider that this was part of it, that's totally my bad. Would you consider it anywhere close to GA? I have never done this before. dannymusiceditor Speak up! 00:35, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
- No worries, and it is difficult for me to say as I have never worked on a tour article before. There is definitely good work there, as there already citations/references. I would look to tour-related good articles as a point of comparison if you decide to prepare the Evanescence Tour article for GAN. Aoba47 (talk) 02:34, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
- Closed with no consensus to promote. - I suggest nominating this topic again once Evanescence Tour becomes a Good article. GamerPro64 22:56, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Disney rail transport[edit]
- Contributor(s): Jackdude101
I am nominating Disney rail transport as a featured topic in order to group all of the inter-related articles that I have improved to featured status related to Walt Disney's love of trains, and specifically steam trains. Other articles that I am currently improving, such as Carolwood Pacific Railroad and Grizzly Flats Railroad, can be added after their quality levels are upgraded. All of the listed articles are featured and heavily connected to each other --Jackdude101 talk cont 01:26, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- Does not satisfy WP:WIAFT criteria I am closing this nomination right now because it fails to satisfy WP:WIAFT criterion 1(d): "There are no obvious gaps (missing or low quality articles) in the topic. A topic must not cherry pick only the best articles to become featured together." Looking at Rail transport in Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, there are quite a few number of articles that would need to be improved to at least GA status before a topic such as this would be eligible for a nomination.--十八 01:34, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Naruto manga chapters[edit]
- Contributor(s): 1989
There was a misunderstanding with the demotion of the former FT. The nominator of the demotion probably was not aware that the articles for Part II was split because the list was too large. Splitting a list for size reasons does not automatically demote the list being split, at least that was not the case for List of The Simpsons episodes (seasons 1-20). --MCMLXXXIX 18:42, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
- Director comment' - I just looked at the talk page for Part II, volumes 49–72) and it looks like it isn't supposed to be a Featured List since it wasn't even nominated. The article being listed as featured is misleading. GamerPro64 18:51, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
- @GamerPro64: Did you read the talk page fully? Contents from the list was split from the original Part II list, which is a featured list. Like I've said before, splitting a list for size reasons does not automatically demote the list being split, at least that was not the case for List of The Simpsons episodes (seasons 1-20).-- MCMLXXXIX 18:55, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Giants2008, PresN, and The Rambling Man: Pinging the delegates and director of Featured Lists to understand what the precedent is about splitting lists because I have never heard this before. GamerPro64 19:13, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
- Hmm. There's not really a strong precedent, unfortunately. A lot of FLs grow over time, and we don't have any sort of system for periodic reviews of growing lists, so that's a point in favor of size-splitting not causing an issue. On the flip side, when the list was promoted in 2008 (8-9 years ago), it was Chapters 28-40, meaning that the newly split list contains only content that was not reviewed. As such, I'd personally view it not so much as that the existing FL grew so much that it needed to be split, but that the source material grew so much that another list had to be created to hold it all. My conclusion would be that part II part 2 does not inherit the FL status of the original list in this case, and needs a new FLC. (Also, it really bugs me that neither Part II list links to the other in the lead.) --PresN 19:51, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
- After hearing from one of the delegates at Featured List, I am closing this nomination with no consensus to promote. I recommend taking the other list to Featured List so it can be evaluated properly. GamerPro64 16:37, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Rockingham 500[edit]
- Contributor(s): MWright96
All of the articles are at GA level and am confident that they satisfy the GAT guidelines. MWright96 (talk) 20:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Support Looking the articles it looks like it includes all related articles, they are GAs and all. Happy to support. MPJ-DK 22:47, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Considering the scope of the topic, Rockingham Motor Speedway need to be included. It was build specifically for this event, and it just happens that instead of demolishing it, they refurbished it for other (minor) events. Nergaal (talk) 15:15, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- This nomination has been open for over two months with a concern raised about the inclusion of Rockingham Motor Speedway. I am closing this nomination with no consensus to promote. This can always be nominated again at any time. GamerPro64 16:36, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Naruto characters[edit]
The eponymous character of the series is Naruto Uzumaki, an energetic ninja who wishes to become Hokage, the leader of Konohagakure. During the early part of the series, he is assigned to Team 7, in which he meets Sasuke Uchiha, a taciturn and highly skilled "genius" of the Uchiha clan; Sakura Haruno, who is infatuated with Sasuke and has Naruto's attention; and Kakashi Hatake, the quiet and mysterious leader of the team.
- Contributor(s): 1989
The list and the articles meet the topic criteria, since they're all good articles. I'm not having the supporting characters on here because IMO, I would rather have the main characters that are all notable. --1989 (talk) 19:41, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
- Topic does not meet criteria I am quick-failing this nomination based on it failing criterion 1(d): "There are no obvious gaps (missing or low quality articles) in the topic. A topic must not cherry pick only the best articles to become featured together.". You would need all of the articles in Category:Naruto characters in the topic to satisfy this criterion. Fortunately, only two of those articles, Hinata Hyuga and Jiraiya (Naruto), have yet to be promoted to at least GA level, so the topic is pretty close to being eligible for nomination.--十八 00:02, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
- I will have to oppose as well as the articles for Hinata Hyuga and Jiraiya (Naruto) are currently not near the level expected for a GA. I would suggest withdrawing this until those articles become GAs in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 23:49, 22 January 2017 (UTC)