Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Good log/April 2015

Spanish conquest of the Maya

5 articles

Contributor(s): Simon Burchell

This group of articles now offers comprehensive coverage of the Spanish conquest of the entire Maya area, from the first Spanish expeditions off the coast of Yucatán to the fall of the last Maya kingdom in Petén almost 200 years later. This is a self nomination for a group of articles I have been working on for four years or so. --Simon Burchell (talk) 20:11, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Big support: Fantastic articles and it is great to see South American history get covered (well) for a change. I'm no expert and can't comment on whether anything else should have been included, but the articles seem of very high quality. I might recommend shifting some of the pictures around (in a couple of cases, the text is sandwiched between two images which looks odd) but obviously that is only a small thing. —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:47, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I found one instance in the parent article Spanish conquest of the Maya and have moved the images. All the best, Simon Burchell (talk) 09:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nergaal (talk) 14:32, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a lot of work, and it's clear Simon is very experienced with Mesoamerican topics and Wikipedia editing. This seems to pass all GT criteria.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 18:43, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. - GamerPro64 14:12, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel Cinematic Universe films

Contributor(s): Favre1fan93, TriiipleThreat, Richiekim, Fandraltastic, Adamstom.97, among others

I am nominating the Marvel Cinematic Universe films to be a Good Topic. All released films have been made GA, while the main topic article, the list of film actors, and list of accolades for The Avengers were all made into Featured Lists. A more inclusive book can be found at Book:Marvel Cinematic Universe. If nominated, I'd like to ask that the retention period for future films be six months. Using our most recent article to become a GA (Guardians of the Galaxy) as an example, the film released on August 1, 2014, and by February 1, 2015, all remaining relevant info needed to complete a GA review (home media info, box office results, some awards/nominations, etc.) had been acquired. I would also like suggestions for the image. Other options include the image at the list of film actors article, or a solo image of possibly Robert Downey Jr. Thank you, and enjoy the topic. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:51, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Commment Since Avengers: Age of Ultron and Ant-Man (film) already have articles, they need to be added to the topic for completeness per criteria 1(d) and 3(c). Also, I would like to point out that after the release of Skyfall for the James Bond films topic, it was nominated at WP:GAN on January 4, 2013, less than 3 months after its release, and became a GA less than one month later, so it's not impossible to get a film up to GA within the current three month retention period.--十八 05:06, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Juhachi: Thank you for the feedback. I guess I was unclear in regards to previously not including Avengers: Age of Ultron and Ant-Man. Since those are not GAs yet, will that prohibit this from passing? We will work to get them up to GA in three months then after their release. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:10, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Those two articles need a peer review to fix any issues the articles may have before this topic is eligible to pass.--十八 05:14, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - The reason why 6 months was requested for the retention time was because GotG was shot down within 3 months due to the lack of Home Media and Awards and things like that. Is six months too much to ask for? And how lenient are the retention times before we have to be delisted, particularly if the GA nomination fails due to lack of stability because the box office numbers keep changing?--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 08:32, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      - Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but is 3 months not long enough for the box office numbers to stabilize? I doubt any of these movies' box office numbers changed that dramatically 3 months after their release date, assuming they're even still in theaters by that time. Even in this topic nomination, Winter Soldier was nominated at WP:GAN on July 4, 2014, exactly 3 months after its major US release on April 4, so I'm not really seeing any particular reason to extend the retention period to 6 months. As long as any further additions to this topic were at least nominated by the 3 month retention date (including Age of Ultron and Ant-Man), the topic would only be put up for removal if the GAN failed.--十八 11:31, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        I think 3 months is cutting it very close in terms of having all the material to warrant a GA nom, and an even greater concern would be the stability of the page, even if it has protection. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:02, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What do you plan on doing about the soundracks? I think the 3 months rule should be changed to 6 months independent of this nom. Nergaal (talk) 16:01, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Are we just going for the films then? Or will the TV series/tie-in comics/one-shots/any other side media be added once they are all up to grade?--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 20:34, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- This one is just for the films. If you check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Marvel Cinematic Universe task force/Good Topic status you can see how we have divided up most of the MCU into topics and subtopics. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - It looks to me that the music list should be part of this topic, not the overview topic. Alternatively, this topic should have the scores lists included here. Nergaal (talk) 23:13, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - The music should not be part of this topic at all. That is completely separate from the intended scope of the topic. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:02, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering why I saw File:GA candidate cluster.svg (which I don't remember seeing before now) at the top of Talk:Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and what was going on with this seemingly double WP:Good article nomination. Now I know. Flyer22 (talk) 09:33, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose ineligible for good/featured topic when there are two C-class articles included within the nomination, and are films which haven't even been released to theaters yet. Let those get promoted to GA/FA, and then renominate. Snuggums (talk / edits) 09:47, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They have to be included for the scope of the topic, but can't be GA because they have not yet been released (hence the retention time thing). This is an ongoing series and every time a film begins filming it gets moved from the draft space to the main space, as such there will always be a "C-class" article in the topic, or at least until Marvel stop making films for it. By the time "Ant Man" and "Age of Ultron" are GAs, "Cap 3: Civil War" and "Doctor Strange" will be in the mainspace as "C-class" articles, by the time they are GAs, "Guardians of the Galaxy 2" and "Thor 3: Ragnarok" are probably going to be in the mainspace as "C-class" articles.

This cycle will continue until they stop making films for the franchise with such a short window between films.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 10:58, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, looks like it'll be quite some time before this can pass for Featured/Good Topic. My oppose stands. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:01, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That is what the retention time is for though. The released films allow it to pass and then we have three months after the film is released in theaters to get those pages to GA status. Should the James Bond GT be delisted straight away because of "Spectre"?--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 22:09, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned above, those two articles (or any articles in the topic that aren't eligible for GA status) would need to have a peer review to fix any issues the articles may have before this topic is eligible to pass (criteria 3(c)).--十八 23:50, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@SNUGGUMS: Your Oppose should be struck from this nomination, as it is based on a faulty premise and a severe misunderstanding of how FTC operates. The whole point of the retention time is to allow new properties in a subject to have the time to be nominated. All the unreleased films need are a peer review for this topic to be complete. If, three months after the release of the films they are not at GA or higher status, then this topic can be nominated for delisting. Silver seren^C 09:42, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If that's so, I'm nuetral now. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:38, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since we will always be in a "fail" state for this topic, as Ditto51 pointed out, because by the time (right now) the two 'C' articles will be GA, there will be more in production 'C' film articles. Thus, I will be starting peer reviews for Avengers: Age of Ultron and Ant-Man, in hopes of having them pass before April 2015, when our next film is entering production. I will link those discussions here once they have been created. That will solve our problem, correct Juhachi? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:05, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but as you said, if the next film gets an article before this topic passes, you'll have to add that film to this topic, also with a completed peer review.--十八 22:23, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. I can only create one peer review, so waiting on Avengers: AoU to be created. But there is a back log in that space so hopefully it will get done. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:24, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done it--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 00:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Peer review/Ant-Man (film)/archive1 - Ant-Man's peer review. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:51, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Peer review/Avengers: Age of Ultron/archive1 - Age of Ultrons's peer review. --Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 00:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support It looks like all the requirements for this topic have been met and, as a topic based on just the films, appears to be complete. I support its nomination, contingent on the peer reviews being completed in a timely fashion. You might want to nudge some people in various places to contribute to the peer reviews to get them done. Silver seren^C 09:42, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update I would just like to say that, while they are still open, both "C" class articles have been peer reviewed. If they have to be closed to proceed, that's fine, but hoping this can be looked at once again to hopefully be passed. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:02, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support I've helped some of those articles (including nominating Iron Man 3 for the GA), and know this topic is an outstanding work. In any case, at a certain point we could split "Phase 1" and "Phase 2" subtopics once the articles on Phase 3 movies appear, forcing the addition of more C-Class articles. (not to mention there's potential for an overall MCU topic, given Marvel Cinematic Universe and Marvel One-Shots are also Good Articles) igordebraga ≠ 14:33, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Igordebraga: The status of other articles and how they relate to other potential Good Topics can be found here for your info. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:53, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like there's a lot of work. At least the movies are done! igordebraga ≠ 03:53, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@GamerPro64 and Juhachi: Is there anything else you are looking for with this nomination for it to be promoted? Thanks for the comments. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:46, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am waiting to see if there will be more discussion and/or supports/opposes before this nomination will be closed.--十八 20:08, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:24, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support I don't mind the two C-class articles; the nominator's explanation was sufficient in proving that there may constantly be articles in this topic that won't yet meet GA class and that's okay.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 18:47, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This deserves to be a Good Topic. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:04, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. --十八 07:43, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Good log/April 2015

Spanish conquest of the Maya

Marvel Cinematic Universe films

Supplementary nominations