Difference between revisions of "Template:FAC-instructions"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Bishonen
(Rm all the emphasis on '''''all'''''. Editors will IMO pay less, not more, attention to instructions formatted in a way that says "We know you're idiots".)
imported>SandyGeorgia
(Misleading, include commenting which is an option obscured in the collapse by this heading)
 
(314 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{| style="clear:both; background:none;"
+
{{For|the similar process page for [[WP:GA|''good articles'']]|Wikipedia:Good article nominations}}
 +
:''Page too long and unwieldy? Try adding [[Wikipedia:Nominations viewer|nominations viewer]] to [[Special:MyPage/skin.js|your scripts page]].''
 
{|
 
{|
| width="60%" style="padding:1em 1em 1em 1em; border:1px solid #dfdfdf; background-color:#FFFAF0" valign="top"|
+
| style="background:#e6f2ff; border:1px solid #a3b1bf; padding:1em; vertical-align:top; width:80%;"|
  
Here we determine which articles are featured on [[Wikipedia:Featured articles]]. '''A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work.''' See [[Wikipedia:What is a featured article|what is a featured article]] for criteria.
+
[[File:Cscr-candidate.svg|left|50px|This star, with one point broken, indicates that an article is a candidate on this page.]]
 +
Here, we determine which articles are to be [[Wikipedia:Featured articles|featured articles (FAs)]]. FAs exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and satisfy the [[Wikipedia:Featured article criteria|FA criteria]]. '''All editors are welcome to review nominations'''; please see the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-04-07/Dispatches|review FAQ]].
  
If you nominate an article, you will be expected to make a good-faith effort to address objections that are raised. If you nominate something you have worked on, note it as a ''self-nomination''. Please do not place more than one nomination at a time — this makes it difficult to do each article and its objections justice. You may wish to receive feedback before nominating an article here, by listing it at [[Wikipedia:Peer review]].
+
Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at [[Wikipedia:Peer review|Peer review]]. Editors considering their first nomination, and any subsequent nomination before their first FA promotion, are '''strongly advised''' to [[Wikipedia:Mentoring for FAC|seek the involvement of a mentor]], to assist in the preparation and processing of the nomination. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the featured article candidates (FAC) process. Nominators who are not [https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo significant contributors to the article] should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make efforts to address objections promptly.  An article should not be on Featured article candidates and Peer review or [[WP:GAN|Good article nominations]] at the same time.
  
Consensus must be reached for an article to be [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log#Full current month log|promoted]] to featured article status. If enough time passes without objections being resolved, nominations will be removed from the candidates list and [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations|archived]].
+
The FAC coordinators—[[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]], [[User:Ealdgyth|Ealdgyth]] and [[User:Gog the Mild|Gog the Mild]]—determine the timing of the process for each nomination. For a nomination to be [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log/{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}|promoted]] to FA status, [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the coordinators determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations/{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}|archived]] if, in the judgment of the coordinators:
 +
* actionable objections have not been resolved;
 +
* consensus for promotion has not been reached;
 +
* insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met; or
 +
* a nomination is unprepared, after at least one reviewer has suggested it be withdrawn.
  
<small>[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates&action=purge Purge page cache]</small>
+
It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the main thrust of the process is to generate and resolve ''critical'' comments in relation to the criteria, and why such resolution is given considerably more weight than declarations of support.
| valign="top" style="padding:1em; border:1px solid #dfdfdf; background-color:#FFFAF0" |
+
 
{{Shortcut|[[WP:FAC]]}}
+
Please do not use graphics or templates on FAC nomination pages. Graphics such as {{done}} and {{not done}} slow down the page load time, and complex templates can lead to errors in the FAC archives. The only templates that are acceptable are {{tl|xt}}, {{tl|!xt}}, and {{tl|tq}}; templates such as {{tl|green}} that apply colours to text and are used to highlight examples; and {{tl|collapse top}} and {{tl|collapse bottom}}, used to hide offtopic discussions.
{{Fapages}}
+
 
|-
+
An editor is allowed to be the sole nominator of only one article at a time, but two nominations may be allowed if the editor is a co-nominator on at least one of them. If a nomination is archived, the nominator(s) should take adequate time to work on resolving issues before re-nominating. None of the nominators may nominate or co-nominate any article for two weeks unless given leave to do so by a coordinator; if such an article is nominated without asking for leave, a coordinator will decide whether to remove it. A coordinator may exempt from this restriction an archived nomination that attracted no (or minimal) feedback.
| colspan=2 style="padding:1em 1em 1em 1em; border:1px solid #dfdfdf; background-color:#FFFAF0" valign="top"|
+
 
<span style="font-size:16pt">Nomination procedure</span>
+
To contact the FAC coordinators, please leave a message on the [[Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates|FAC talk page]], or use the {{tl|@FAC}} [[Wikipedia:Notifications|notification]] template elsewhere.
  
#'''Check the [[Wikipedia:What is a featured article|featured article criteria]]''' and make sure the article meets all of them before nominating.
+
A [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/archiving|bot will update the article talk page]] after the article is promoted or the nomination archived; the delay in bot processing can range from minutes to several days, and the <code><nowiki>{{FAC}}</nowiki></code> template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates {{nowrap|<code><nowiki>{{Article history}}</nowiki></code>}}.
#Place <tt><nowiki>{{fac}}</nowiki></tt> on the talk page of the nominated article.
 
#From there, click on the "leave comments" link.
 
#''(If you are resubmitting an article)'' Use the '''Move''' button to rename the previous nomination to an archive. For example, [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Television]] &rarr; [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Television/archive1]]
 
#Place <tt><nowiki>===[[name of nominated article]]===</nowiki></tt> at the top.
 
#Below it, write your reason for nominating the article.
 
#Finally, place <tt><nowiki>{{Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/name of nominated article}}</nowiki></tt> at the top of the list of nominees on this page by first copying the above, clicking "edit" on the top of the page, and then pasting, making sure to add the name of the nominated article.
 
  
<span style="font-size:16pt">Supporting and objecting</span>
+
<small>[[#toc|Table of Contents]]</small> – <small>This page:</small> {{purge|<small>Purge cache</small>}}, [[tools:~dispenser/summary/Featured article candidates|<small title="View the status of external links from articles listed here">Checklinks</small>]], [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/rdcheck.py?headlinks=WP:FAC|<small title="View redirects from articles listed here">Check redirects</small >]], [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py?headlinks:WP:FAC|<small title="View the links that need to be disambiguated from articles listed here">Dablinks</small>]]
 +
| style="background:#e6f2ff; border:1px solid #a3b1bf; padding:1em; vertical-align:top;" |
 +
{{Shortcut|WP:FAC}}
 +
{{FApages}}
 +
|-
 +
| colspan="2" style="background:#f5faff; border:1px solid #a3b1bf; padding:1em;"|
  
Please read nominated articles fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.
+
{{collapse top|How to nominate an article}}
* To edit nominations in order to comment on them, you must click the "edit" link to the right of the article nomination on which you wish to comment (not the overall page's "edit this page" link).
+
<span style="font-size:1.4em">Nomination procedure</span>
* If you believe an article meets '''''all''''' of the [[Wikipedia:What is a featured article|criteria]], write <nowiki>'''Support'''</nowiki> followed by your reasons.
+
{{Featured article tools/without list}}
* If you oppose a nomination, write <nowiki>'''Object'''</nowiki> followed by the reason for your objection. Each objection must provide '''a specific rationale that can be addressed'''. If nothing can be done in principle to "fix" the source of the objection, the objection may be ignored. This includes objections to an article's suitability for the Wikipedia Main Page, unless such suitability can be fixed (featured articles, despite being featured, may be marked so as not to be showcased on the Main Page).
+
# Before nominating an article, ensure that it meets all of the [[Wikipedia:Featured article criteria|FA criteria]] and that [[WP:PR|peer reviews]] are closed and archived. The featured article toolbox (at right) can help you check some of the criteria.
** To withdraw an objection, strike it out (with <tt><nowiki><s>...</s></nowiki></tt>) rather than removing it.
+
# Place <code><nowiki>{{subst:FAC}}</nowiki></code> at the top of the talk page of the nominated article and save the page.
 +
# From the FAC template, click on the red "initiate the nomination" link or the blue "leave comments" link.  You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please post to [[WT:FAC|the FAC talk page]] for assistance.
 +
# Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>, and save the page.
 +
# Copy this text: <code><nowiki>{{Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/name of nominated article/archiveNumber}}</nowiki></code> (substituting Number), and '''<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Featured article candidates|action=edit&section=1}} edit this page]</span>''' (i.e., the page you are reading at the moment), pasting the template at the top of the list of candidates. Replace "name of ..." with the name of your nomination. This will [[Wikipedia:Transclusion|transclude]] the nomination into this page. In the event that the title of the nomination page differs from this format, use the page's title instead.
 +
{{collapse bottom}}
 +
{{collapse top|Commenting, supporting and opposing}}
 +
<span style="font-size:1.4em">Supporting and opposing</span>
 +
* To respond to a nomination, click the "Edit" link to the right of the article nomination (not the "Edit this page" link for the ''whole'' FAC page).  All editors are welcome to review nominations; see [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-04-07/Dispatches|the review FAQ]] for an overview of the review process.
 +
* To support a nomination, write <nowiki>*'''Support'''</nowiki>, '''followed''' by your reason(s), which should be based on a full reading of the text. If you have been a significant contributor to the article before its nomination, please indicate this. A reviewer who specializes in certain areas of the FA criteria should indicate whether the support is applicable to all of the criteria.
 +
* To oppose a nomination, write <nowiki>*'''Object''' or *'''Oppose'''</nowiki>, '''followed''' by your reason(s). Each objection must provide '''a specific rationale that can be addressed'''. If nothing can be done in principle to address the objection, a coordinator may disregard it. References on style and grammar do not always agree; if a contributor cites support for a certain style in a standard reference work or other authoritative source, reviewers should consider accepting it. Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed. To withdraw the objection, strike it out (with <code><nowiki><s> ... </s></nowiki></code>) rather than removing it. Alternatively, reviewers may transfer lengthy, resolved commentary to the FAC archive talk page, leaving a link in a note on the FAC archive.
 +
* To provide constructive input on a nomination without specifically supporting or objecting, write <nowiki>*'''Comment'''</nowiki> followed by your advice.
 +
* {{anchor|subsection|semicolon}}For ease of editing, a reviewer who enters lengthy commentary may create a neutral ''fourth-level'' subsection, named either <nowiki>==== Review by EditorX ====</nowiki> or <nowiki> ==== Comments by EditorX ====</nowiki> (do ''not'' use third-level or higher section headers). Please do not create subsections for short statements of support or opposition—for these a simple <nowiki>*'''Support''',</nowiki><nowiki>*'''Oppose'''</nowiki>, or <nowiki>*'''Comment'''</nowiki> followed by your statement of opinion, is sufficient. Please do not use a semicolon to bold a subheading; this creates [[WP:ACCESS|accessibility]] problems.
 +
* {{anchor|below}}If a nominator feels that an Oppose has been addressed, they should say so, either after the reviewer's signature, or by interspersing their responses in the list provided by the reviewer. Per [[WP:TALK|talk page guidelines]], nominators should not cap, alter, strike, or add graphics to comments from other editors. If a nominator finds that an opposing reviewer is not returning to the nomination page to revisit improvements, this should be noted on the nomination page, with a diff to the reviewer's talk page showing the request to reconsider.
 +
{{collapse bottom}}
 
|}
 
|}
 +
<noinclude>
 +
{{documentation}}
 +
</noinclude>

Latest revision as of 10:49, 31 December 2020

Page too long and unwieldy? Try adding nominations viewer to your scripts page.
This star, with one point broken, indicates that an article is a candidate on this page.

Here, we determine which articles are to be featured articles (FAs). FAs exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and satisfy the FA criteria. All editors are welcome to review nominations; please see the review FAQ.

Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at Peer review. Editors considering their first nomination, and any subsequent nomination before their first FA promotion, are strongly advised to seek the involvement of a mentor, to assist in the preparation and processing of the nomination. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the featured article candidates (FAC) process. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make efforts to address objections promptly. An article should not be on Featured article candidates and Peer review or Good article nominations at the same time.

The FAC coordinators—Ian Rose, Ealdgyth and Gog the Mild—determine the timing of the process for each nomination. For a nomination to be promoted to FA status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the coordinators determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the coordinators:

  • actionable objections have not been resolved;
  • consensus for promotion has not been reached;
  • insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met; or
  • a nomination is unprepared, after at least one reviewer has suggested it be withdrawn.

It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the main thrust of the process is to generate and resolve critical comments in relation to the criteria, and why such resolution is given considerably more weight than declarations of support.

Please do not use graphics or templates on FAC nomination pages. Graphics such as  Done and Not done slow down the page load time, and complex templates can lead to errors in the FAC archives. The only templates that are acceptable are {{xt}}, {{!xt}}, and {{tq}}; templates such as {{green}} that apply colours to text and are used to highlight examples; and {{collapse top}} and {{collapse bottom}}, used to hide offtopic discussions.

An editor is allowed to be the sole nominator of only one article at a time, but two nominations may be allowed if the editor is a co-nominator on at least one of them. If a nomination is archived, the nominator(s) should take adequate time to work on resolving issues before re-nominating. None of the nominators may nominate or co-nominate any article for two weeks unless given leave to do so by a coordinator; if such an article is nominated without asking for leave, a coordinator will decide whether to remove it. A coordinator may exempt from this restriction an archived nomination that attracted no (or minimal) feedback.

To contact the FAC coordinators, please leave a message on the FAC talk page, or use the {{@FAC}} notification template elsewhere.

A bot will update the article talk page after the article is promoted or the nomination archived; the delay in bot processing can range from minutes to several days, and the {{FAC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates {{Article history}}.

Table of ContentsThis page: Script error: No such module "Purge"., Checklinks, Check redirects, Dablinks

Featured content:

Featured article candidates (FAC)

Featured article review (FAR)

Today's featured article (TFA):

Featured article tools:

How to nominate an article

Nomination procedure

Toolbox
  1. Before nominating an article, ensure that it meets all of the FA criteria and that peer reviews are closed and archived. The featured article toolbox (at right) can help you check some of the criteria.
  2. Place {{subst:FAC}} at the top of the talk page of the nominated article and save the page.
  3. From the FAC template, click on the red "initiate the nomination" link or the blue "leave comments" link. You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please post to the FAC talk page for assistance.
  4. Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with ~~~~, and save the page.
  5. Copy this text: {{Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/name of nominated article/archiveNumber}} (substituting Number), and edit this page (i.e., the page you are reading at the moment), pasting the template at the top of the list of candidates. Replace "name of ..." with the name of your nomination. This will transclude the nomination into this page. In the event that the title of the nomination page differs from this format, use the page's title instead.
Commenting, supporting and opposing

Supporting and opposing

  • To respond to a nomination, click the "Edit" link to the right of the article nomination (not the "Edit this page" link for the whole FAC page). All editors are welcome to review nominations; see the review FAQ for an overview of the review process.
  • To support a nomination, write *'''Support''', followed by your reason(s), which should be based on a full reading of the text. If you have been a significant contributor to the article before its nomination, please indicate this. A reviewer who specializes in certain areas of the FA criteria should indicate whether the support is applicable to all of the criteria.
  • To oppose a nomination, write *'''Object''' or *'''Oppose''', followed by your reason(s). Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to address the objection, a coordinator may disregard it. References on style and grammar do not always agree; if a contributor cites support for a certain style in a standard reference work or other authoritative source, reviewers should consider accepting it. Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed. To withdraw the objection, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>) rather than removing it. Alternatively, reviewers may transfer lengthy, resolved commentary to the FAC archive talk page, leaving a link in a note on the FAC archive.
  • To provide constructive input on a nomination without specifically supporting or objecting, write *'''Comment''' followed by your advice.
  • For ease of editing, a reviewer who enters lengthy commentary may create a neutral fourth-level subsection, named either ==== Review by EditorX ==== or ==== Comments by EditorX ==== (do not use third-level or higher section headers). Please do not create subsections for short statements of support or opposition—for these a simple *'''Support''',*'''Oppose''', or *'''Comment''' followed by your statement of opinion, is sufficient. Please do not use a semicolon to bold a subheading; this creates accessibility problems.
  • If a nominator feels that an Oppose has been addressed, they should say so, either after the reviewer's signature, or by interspersing their responses in the list provided by the reviewer. Per talk page guidelines, nominators should not cap, alter, strike, or add graphics to comments from other editors. If a nominator finds that an opposing reviewer is not returning to the nomination page to revisit improvements, this should be noted on the nomination page, with a diff to the reviewer's talk page showing the request to reconsider.
Template documentation[view] [edit] [history] [purge]

See also