Wikipedia talk:Featured and good topic candidates
|
|
Archives: |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. | |
Updating to featured topic
[edit]Hello. Apologies in advance if this is obvious, but I was wondering how to nominate a pre-existing good topic to become a featured topic? Wikipedia:Good topics/All Money Is Legal was a good topic, but after the promotion of "I Got That" to FA status, two of the three articles are now FAs, which I think makes it a featured topic instead of a good topic. Apologies again if this is obvious. It has been a while since I have worked on anything related to topics. Thank you in advance! Aoba47 (talk) 15:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- GTs eligible for FT status do not require a nomination. I have moved it to the FTs page.--NØ 16:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for clarifying that for me. Aoba47 (talk) 17:48, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- What would be the produre for demoting a topic? If a topic with 3 GAs and 3 FAs suddenly had another GA I would no longer be featured Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:50, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- A new article being added to the topic would require a supplementary nomination. If the percentage of featured content dropped below 50%, the topic would be moved from the FT page to GT.--NØ 17:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Saint Kitts and Nevis at the Olympics
[edit]I got Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2024 Summer Olympics, to GA. Should this be added to the Saint Kitts and Nevis at the Olympics topic. History6042😊 (Contact me) 22:49, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Would this be a good idea for a topic?
[edit]Hello. I'm new to good topics, and was wondering about the following potential topic where all the articles are WP:Good articles.
What do you say, is this a good idea for a topic? TompaDompa (talk) 11:43, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Absolutely! Per Template:Astronomical locations in fiction I'd support it Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 11:53, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- I can see various problems with this. Even if we generously allow that black holes are stars, what about all of the other types of stars? White dwarfs in fiction, red giants in fiction, variable stars in fiction, red dwarfs in fiction, binary stars in fiction? Can some be lumped into main sequence stars in fiction? Gog the Mild (talk) 13:15, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Well those articles don't exist therefore they wouldnt be included Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 14:05, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Those are WP:REDLINKS (apart from binary stars in fiction, which redirects to Extrasolar planets in fiction#In multiple star systems) for a reason, namely that sources don't really treat those as stand-alone topics worthy of overarching analysis. I have not come across any sources that cover the appearance of e.g. white dwarfs in fiction that would allow for the creation of a policy-compliant article on that subject to be written. As George Mann says in The Mammoth Encyclopedia of Science Fiction,
Stars, although there is a certain poetical reference to them in much science fiction, do not actually feature in much depth in most SF stories.
. The divisions that make sense for articles about stars and star types in the real world do not necessarily do so for articles about their appearances in fiction. TompaDompa (talk) 14:08, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Would something like this work as a topic?
[edit]
I've gotten the two articles to FL over the last year or so without really planning on a FT, but I started thinking about it and was wondering if it would even be possible. All of the lists are part of the Portland Trail Blazers lists category, but these are the only one really focused on the players of the team. -- ZooBlazer 06:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)