Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Good log/August 2011

Contributor(s): JKBrooks85

Procedural nom; this topic was originally delisted since the primary article writer left. He has returned and brought the articles up to GA though, so this topic is again complete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 17:25, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Some dead links are present in the articles. See book report. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:32, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:26, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Still some. Citation 37 in 2008 Orange Bowl e.g. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 06:45, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contributor(s): Ruby2010

It's been a lot of work, but I have finally promoted all of the Fringe season 2 articles to either GA or FA status. This will be my first GT, and I'm ready and willing to address any of your comments. Thanks. --Ruby2010 comment! 03:19, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the support. Unearthed was indeed included on the season 2 DVD, and is generally considered a part of that season due to the broadcast date. Also, what deadlinks are you referring to? None came up during the recent GA reviews. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 18:00, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see from the book report that Grey Matters has 2 × [citation needed], (which it looks like someone removed the citations stating it was not a RS), but I don't see any deadlink notifications either.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 18:10, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Had a wee look online, and I couldn't find anything that met WP:RS that made the connections cited. If they're not mentioned on the DVD, maybe in a featurette or commentary, it might be safer removing them until they can be sourced. GRAPPLE X 02:37, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the content in question and added it to talkpage until suitable references come along. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 21:05, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:40, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there's a few dead links in Fringe (season 2), Northwest Passage (Fringe) and Over There (Fringe) . See the book report ("Ext Links" tool) for details. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 07:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All of those links belonged to a certain author at the Vancouver Sun. I couldn't find them or the cited information anywhere else on Google, so I just deleted the URLs and kept them as treelinks. I also addressed a few issues with the Chicago Tribune sources in the season 2 article. Thanks for taking the time to look them over, Ruby2010 comment! 16:03, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Battleships of Germany

edit

I have worked on this project for over four years, and it is finally complete. Parsecboy (talk) 12:39, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support a 62 article Good Topic with a quarter of them FA class. Jim Sweeney (talk) 13:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support, although I'm not sure if the sub-topic version is preferable. This is visually very impressive, but rather bulky.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:49, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there is precedent for a topic this large - Wikipedia:Featured topics/Governors of Kentucky has 60 articles in it. Parsecboy (talk) 14:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the big version, not only because it looks grand and majestic and more visually appealing but also because it is far more illuminating and has a more cohesive and encyclopedic feel to it. Also, it is equally well logically set up as the shortened version. Great work by Parsecboy. - DSachan (talk) 09:44, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If we're going with the 62-article version, should we still have the many subtopics for this one? Wizardman Operation Big Bear 18:01, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, apparently SMS Ostfriesland has some broken references. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:39, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? There's only one online reference and it's working fine. Parsecboy (talk) 12:49, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the single topic. I wasn't a fan of having the different topics in the ultimate form, although I think that worked great for the development of the entire topic. I may have to steal that idea for the hurricane project. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:01, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note that I will likely do this promotion in two parts. The first will be to cut the 11 merged topics and turn them into former ones, the second will be promotion of the big topic. It may be over the course of a couple days, so don't panic if it looks like I'm just removing a bunch of topics. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:52, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus to promote as single topic, will handle merging issues tonight and officially promote tomorrow night. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 02:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Supplementary nominations

edit
  1. Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Battleships of Germany/addition1
Contributor(s): Cyclonebiskit, Hurricanehink, Mitchazenia

All of the articles now are good. I can't see any of the other storms getting articles with how weak and dumpy they are. Thus, I'm happy to nominate this batch of articles for GT. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:34, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contributor(s): Adabow

I have worked on these articles since late last year, and I believe that the articles cover the topic of Usher's fifth studio album comprehensively. The tour was not huge, so it is included in the album article. --Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:55, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contributor(s): Ucucha

Since the 1980s, weird teeth have been turning up in ancient rocks in South America. We don't quite know what they are—most likely multituberculates—and this series therefore contains a lot of uncertainties. Possibly it covers two quite unrelated groups of animals. All articles are GAs (thanks to the reviewing efforts of Sasata, Casliber, J Milburn, and Visionholder), so this is a GT nomination. --Ucucha 01:48, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I think it's worth pointing out that the formatting of the references is inconsistent between the articles. Ferugliotheriidae and Ferugliotherium have the more standard quoted articles, italic journals, while the other three use a different style (which I seem to remember is a style used in a journal you read). If we're bringing these together as one topic, consistency would be nice- I'd go with the former, as it's what the MoS recommends. J Milburn (talk) 15:27, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I changed the citation style I use on articles about halfway through this topic. I don't think there's a requirement for articles in an FT to be consistent with each other as regards references, and WP:CITEHOW says we shouldn't be changing reference styles. Ucucha 15:30, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would prefer another comment or two on this one. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:44, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for good topic because after a lot of work, I think that I can say that it meets the criteria. Thank you for any comments, CrowzRSA 22:22, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • But the discography article covers the following:
—Studio albums
—Live albums
—Extended plays
—Box sets
—Singles
—Soundtracks
—Music videos
—Videos
  • Since soundtracks really don't have much to do with the band, I didn't include them, but since Singles are covered on the page, and were releases, they should be included in the topic. CrowzRSA 01:30, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get a couple more comments here? Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Would it be a good idea to have the studio albums be a subtopic in here? It'd cut this topic almost in half but it would keep the other one intact. I don't have an opinion either way on that. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:17, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note Someone nominated Live Intrusion for deletion. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:04, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There's a few dead links in a couple of articles. See the book report for details. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:05, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is a pretty impressive scoreboard. It seems that all notable items in the discography of this band are GA or FA, so it would make the most sense to me to have a single topic and merge in all the smaller subtopics, as we might be going to do with the German battlecruisers above. That way, all the related stuff is together. Ucucha 00:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

West Coast Express

edit
Contributor(s): Leech44 - Orlandkurtenbach

Ice hockey lines consist of three forwards (a center, left wing & right wing). Though it is common for line combinations to be changed including in game, productive lines will stay together. If a line is successful or popular enough it is not uncommon for the line to receive a nickname. The West Coast Express was one such line that played for the Vancouver Canucks. I have nominated this for a Good Topic based on the fact that all three member articles of the line are GA as well as the article about the line itself. I feel that this is very similar to the wrestling tag team GTs that already exist. Thanks for your time.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 15:12, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the assistance.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 17:54, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the support. As for the template WP:ice hockey is pretty particular when it comes to templates and if I were to create one for these four articles I know it would be deleted.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 02:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]