Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Featured log/December 2007

Carnivàle

Main page	Articles
Carnivàle	List of Carnivàle episodes - Characters of Carnivàle - Mythology of Carnivàle

Self-nom Inspired by the Kingdom Hearts FT, I chose my then favorite TV series to try if a full FT is also possible for TV shows. Carnivàle is covered in whole in four articles - one for the overview and general production, one for the plot, one for the characters, and one for the meaning. As the show is probably among the most complex TV shows ever produced, a newbie reader (or even fan) would probably still need to read and jump between the three subarticles to "get it" (that's also why I wrote these articles - I didn't "get" the show and wanted to share my new online findings with others). I think the two GA articles are very close to FA (I have the intention to take the Characters articles to FAC sometime in the near future), so I don't anticipate any opposition for missing gaps. I also had a peer review, with only minor suggestions for changes. The prose is still getting tweaked all the time. I know that WP:WIAFT recommends a template, but the topic's template (something like this) was TfD'ed back in August, with the deletion rationale still somewhat applying. Anyway, please fire away. – sgeureka ^t•c 18:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

• Support - The series seems fascinating, makes me want to watch this show....Back to the nomination, it looks comprehensive, half the articles are featured, and it would be a neat addition to the Featured Topic list. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support Nice work, especially with the mythology article. –thedemonhog talk • contributions 23:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support - meets all the criteria. Superb work. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 03:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support, as GA Reviewer of Mythology of Carnivàle. Good work all around. Cirt (talk) 14:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC).
• Support, Very nice work. Silver Sonic Shadow (talk) 03:44, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support as an occasional contributor I have been very impressed with the improvement in these articles and they are the definitive source of information about this show.--Opark 77 (talk) 16:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support A strong group of articles. Qjuad (talk) 23:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support There is an incredible amount of research done in these articles. This is the right grouping for this topic.-BillDeanCarter (talk) 22:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
• Promote --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 08:08, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Supplementary nominations

1. Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Carnivàle/addition1

Seasons of YuYu Hakusho

Main page	Articles
List of YuYu Hakusho episodes	List of YuYu Hakusho episodes (season 1) - List of YuYu Hakusho episodes (season 2) - List of YuYu Hakusho episodes (season 3) - List of YuYu Hakusho episodes (season 4)

This is a topic covering the seasons of the YuYu Hakusho anime, which is composed of four seasons. With all of the articles featured, I feel this topic qualifies under the featured topic criteria. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 03:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

• Again I show cocern over the lack of and poor quality of the story arc articles. In this case, I don't see why the articles even exist. They're cluttered messes that should be deleted or merged into these episode lists. Once they are delt with, I can support. It would be nice if List of YuYu Hakusho chapters could be cleaned up and included with the nomination though. It's a pretty shitty list atm.--SeizureDog (talk) 10:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

• Sagas have been merged. I feel that List of YuYu Hakusho chapters falls outside the topical scope, as the topic stresses that it covers the four seasons of the YuYu Hakusho anime, and all relevant articles are present. Regards, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 22:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

• The scope could easily include the chapter list with a rewording to "YuYu Hakusho media lists", though in this case I'm fine without it. Support.--SeizureDog (talk) 01:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

• That would require a List of YuYu Hakusho media page, as List of YuYu Hakusho episodes likely wouldn't be an appropriate main article. It's a nice future endeavor though. Thanks, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

• Support - Another focused and comprehensive topic, and all Featured too. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support per Judgesurreal777's statement, took the words right out of my mouth. {^_^} Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support: Looks good to me and I believe Judgesurreal777 put it perfectly in his statement. Silver Sonic Shadow (talk) 07:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
• Promote --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 07:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Naruto manga chapters

Main page	Articles
List of Naruto manga volumes	List of Naruto chapters (Part I) - List of Naruto chapters (Part II)

With the main topic just recently achieving FL status, I believe this is ready for a FT nomination. These articles cover the chapters of the Naruto manga, sorted via their appropriate volumes. The two other pages were originally split off the main page due to size concerns, and each compose a significant part of the topic (two parts of the manga storyline). The main page links to the two sub-pages, as well as containing a list of the volumes that compose them. As such, with all three articles featured, I feel that this topic meets WP:WIAFT. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 19:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• Although I'm getting a little ahead of myself, possible image that can be used is here: Image:Kunai05.jpg. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 19:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
• Support - I see no problems with it, the image looks good too. It looks to satisfy the FT criteria. I support it. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC))
• Object - Too narrow. I could see a topic covering all Naruto media, but not just the manga chapters. Besides, Naruto and List of Naruto story arcs are glaring omissions.--SeizureDog 22:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• All Naruto media is gigantic. The topic's scope covers just the manga, which would be identical to a topic covering just the anime episodes (List of Naruto episodes being the main for List of Naruto episodes (Seasons 1-2), List of Naruto episodes (Seasons 3-4), etc.). The main Naruto episode doesn't need to be included as it covers the entire franchise. I could ask why Wikipedia:Featured topics/Seasons of Lost doesn't have Lost (TV series) with that rationale. List of Naruto story arcs could perhaps be included, but I can't see it ever achieving FL status. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 22:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm just saying that List of Naruto media would be a more appropiate topic. By my count, thats about 14 lists, 5 of which are already FLs, hardly "gigantic". You note on Naruto is taken, but my point on List of Naruto story arcs still stands.--SeizureDog 23:15, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I count 19: List of Naruto media, List of Naruto episodes (with the four season lists), List of Naruto manga volumes (with two accompanying lists), the four movies, List of Naruto OVAs, List of Naruto: Shippūden episodes (which cannot achieve FL status as it is ongoing), List of Naruto characters, Naruto Collectible Card Game, List of Naruto video games, and List of Naruto story arcs. A lot of them aren't lists and would require a hell of a lot of work to get to GA status. However, per the current scope, I've added List of Naruto story arcs per your suggestion. As it's likely never going to get FL status, would it be "audited" as per WP:WIAFT? Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 23:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - I would be reluctant to support without the addition of List of Naruto story arcs or some additional article as the criteria state that the topic must consist of at least three distinct articles. I'm not sure if List of Naruto chapters (Part I) and List of Naruto chapters (Part II) really qualify as being "distinct" from each other. Kaldari 23:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• In storyline terms, they cover two very different parts of the manga. You could compare it to different seasons of the same TV series. Yes, the articles are quite similar, but the same can again be said of episode lists. Anyhow, List of Naruto story arcs has been added to the above nomination. As the possibility of it ever achieving FL status is slim, I guess it would be "audited". As I'm fairly new to the FT process, who would perform such an audit? Thanks, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 23:41, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - I realize this point is coming to a close, but I don't see how List of Naruto story arcs is an omission. The original scope of the suggested topic focused on the manga volumes/chapters. But the story arc focuses on the story as it applies to the manga and anime. I can see how the story arc could be a supplementary article to the topic, but not a necessity. As Sephiroth already stated, the two chapter lists are comparable to different seasons of a TV show. And the FT Seasons of Lost has shown that separate segments of a story in a single medium qualify as 3 or more distinct articles. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 23:02, 13 November 2007 (UTC))
• Support excluding the story arcs - Why is that included? Its not featured, its not even sourced, which means it could just be OR. I say dump it and feature the rest. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

• It was placed per the above arguments towards the scope of the list, but per Guyinblack25, it really isn't a missing part of the topic. It wasn't part of the original nomination in any case. I've removed it. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Excellent, now its all Featured, complete and comprehensive for its scope, and now looks like a good featured topic. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Judgesurreal, do you feel that the story arcs article is outside of the topic? Or are you saying to drop it because it's not featured? I'll remind you that cherry picking is not allowed.--SeizureDog (talk) 00:11, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Well the topic is called manga chapters, so they are all listed there without the story arcs included. I also suspect that the story arc article could be a big chunk of original research due to its total lack of referencing, so I'm cool with keeping it out. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:35, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I also feel it is not required to be included, as it does not leave any holes in the information provided by the three lists. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 17:55, 25 November 2007 (UTC))

• I think I will have to side with User:SeizureDog and give this a weak oppose. Of all the media associated with this franchise, choosing only these sections of it doesn't give a complete, unified topic. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 18:23, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
  • If the topic was about the various media in the franchise, then I'd have to agree with you. However, this topic is meant to cover one aspect of the franchise, the manga. And as far as I can see there are no holes in the topic of the Naruto manga. It's similar to the Final Fantasy titles FT and the Final Fantasy VIII FT. There's a larger topic and then a smaller sub topic. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 18:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC))
• Support I agree that this is a suitable topic and each list is very well-done. Tuf-Kat (talk) 02:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - List of Naruto story arcs has recently been merged; thus eliminating it from being included in the topical scope. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support - all are perfect, well written articles filled with sufficient encyclopedic content. The Kunai pic idea sounds good too. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
• Support - definitely looks like a unified topic to me; nice to see it focused on the manga instead of the countless related media. Doceirias (talk) 03:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
• Promote — There was some debate about whether this can be promoted without other media, but a large enough majority feel that it can be. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 05:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)