Battlestar Wiki talk:Featured articles

Added image to talk page so that it doesnt show in the Unused images page. --Mercifull 05:59, 4 April 2006 (CDT)

What?--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 15:38, 4 April 2006 (CDT)

Mercifull is acutely aware that images that are on the unused images report quickly end up on "the island" (or even disappear). That image was uploaded for potential use as the "logo" in a "Featured Article" template. However, it seems a bit small for that purpose. It probably belongs on the island, or maybe even deleted/reuploaded/reworked. --Steelviper 15:43, 4 April 2006 (CDT)

Okay. One day I really want our front page to look like Memory Alpha's front page. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 15:56, 4 April 2006 (CDT)

I think v1.6 of mediawiki will allow some of the Portal-like features they have on their main page with out all the ugly html. Although, honestly, if we could get it to look like memory-alpha WITH ugly hacks and html (even without v1.6) I'd be up for it. --Steelviper 16:07, 4 April 2006 (CDT)

I don't understand computers at all. Just scifi shows. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 16:09, 4 April 2006 (CDT)

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. --Peter Farago 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)

Featured Candidate Requirements

I swiped most of the text from the "quality articles" project, and added a few other requirements as a potential springboard for what a featured article might need. Feel free to hack and slash at it, or discuss it on this talk page. There wasn't much activity on this, so I hoped this would help get the ball rolling. --Steelviper 15:23, 2 May 2006 (CDT)

This isn't really important, but why are featured articles and pictures supposed to be picked by the 7th of each month? Wouldn't it be simpler just to make them due on the 1st of every month? Confusion. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 09:00, 6 June 2006 (CDT)

Already passed. 7th is one week. Gives us time to decide 6-days to pick and debate. Plus, the 1st comes at werid times. Usually the 7th will allow the same ammount of time for each article on the front page. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 09:05, 6 June 2006 (CDT)

Oh okay. Weird times?--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 09:13, 6 June 2006 (CDT)

So do people want to debate this or do we all like it as is? --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 19:03, 11 June 2006 (CDT)