Battlestar Wiki talk:Featured articles/Archive1

What should be the Standards?

Me and Silverviper talked about it for a short while (See below) and came up with those ideas. Now I know we been discussion Battlestar_Wiki:Quality_Articles, but there is a difference. QA are articles that are good enough to be a QA, but not enough to be Featured on the Main Page of the site. Some of the same Criteria for QA can also be established for FA, but FA most go through a more different process for it to be posted on the Main Page. That's all I can think of now. --Shane ^{(C - E)} 20:46, 19 March 2006 (CST)

I don't know, they seem like exactly the same thing to me. I prefer the "featured article" name in any case. --April Arcus 18:29, 4 April 2006 (CDT)

I really think "Quality Articles" is redundant. "Featured Article" makes sense. Memory Alpha just uses "Featured Articles". --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 19:52, 4 April 2006 (CDT)

Google Chat Discussions

Mar 17: Me (Shane) and Matt (Steelviper)

Matt: I'd lean towards deletion
  in its stated form, it's pretty redundant with featured article
1:37 PM in order to be a featured article, an article must possess a certain standard of quality
  (wow... you can quote me on that)
1:38 PM me: (saved! looved google talk)
 Matt: maybe list out some criteria...
  no broken links
  no spelling/grammar issues
 me: Some images
 Matt: citations for all info
  yeah
  images are a must
 me: More than one
1:39 PM Size
 Matt: at least one
 me: To large
  hard to read
  to small.. not enough content
 Matt: I wouldn't hold size against a page
  that would have dq'd the miniseries article
1:40 PM stubs are definitely out
 me: aye
 Matt: it'd be good to quantify a minimum size

Just a note: Matt==Steelviper. Sylverviper is a far more artistic soul on the skiffy boards. --Steelviper 20:58, 19 March 2006 (CST)