Wikinews:Featured article candidates

Shortcut:
WN:FAC

Archives 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6

This is where the Wikinews community selects new featured articles.

• Featured article criteria – please see WN:WIAFA.

• Add suggestions for new articles below. If you are the author, or an author, please include a note that it is your own work. Please justify why you think an article should be featured.

• Nominations are discussed for a minimum of seven days. Please discuss each nomination and try to come to a consensus before listing an article on Wikinews:Featured articles. Please add {{FAC}} to listed articles' talk pages, and add {{FA}} to articles that have passed this on the article. See the archive directory for past nominations.

• Note: Do not nominate articles that have not yet been archived.

Candidates

Consider voting on previous nominations when you add an article to this list!

Please list new candidates at the top.

[OPEN] One year on: Egyptians mark anniversary of protests that toppled Mubarak

Self-nominating; I'm nowadays of the view that covering major stories against mainstream media should be done very well if at all, and this is my effort at just that. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 17:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

• Support And an excellent — plus most-comprehensive — example this is. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 18:57, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
• Support Just to riff a bit on short synthesis about major stories. It has its uses; depending on how msm covers it, putting things into clear neutral perspective may have significant value for readers too (plus, of course, the experience it provides to the author(s) and the rounding it provides to our archives). But I admit, short synthesis seems to me more suited to under-reported stories. It's certainly a capital mistake to write a short item on a widely covered story just because we "should have something on it". </riff>

This article is worthy. --Pi zero (talk) 21:01, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

• Support This article has several strong points that make it worthy for nomination and support: The author's focus coincided with the first anniversary of the Jan. 25, 2011 protests and added the most recent information about the country's transition. Timely! This took forethought, advanced preparation and diligence to meet the deadline. The author's comprehensive overview, or depth, was well organized and could be divided into at least three sections: 1) transition to a new government, 2) the economy, and 3) human rights. One suggestion for improvement would be to use sections that would make it easier to read. The reporter also used quality sources and provided the audience with good information about each point. The contrasting photos of Tahir Square "then" and "now" was a good approach to show continuation of negative public sentiment toward the government. The main reason I support this nomination is that the article used synthesis to add perspective. Crtew (talk) 17:39, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

[OPEN] Observing the 2012 Human Trafficking Awareness Day in the US, and wider world

Imho a compelling read. It's got "only" two pictures, but they're good ones. Not only is OR not a requirement for an FA, but it isn't even the first listed optional-but-encouraged criterion at WN:WIAFA. First listed is "articles that were worked on by several authors, to highlight the collaborative nature of Wikinews." We often forget that one, because multi-author news writing turns out to be difficult to do well; but in this case the article has over a dozen authors (fourteen, is it?), and did come out well, so I think it a very solid candidate. (Nor was I the first to mention "FA" in the same breath with this article; but I am nominating it.) --Pi zero (talk) 01:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

• Support as nominator. --Pi zero (talk) 01:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
• Support for the highly collaborative nature of this in-depth report. What it has highlighted are some of the difficulties in that type of work. As Crtew pointed out, where TIME have a multi-author piece, one person is tasked with going over the article in its entirety to make it flow and 'paper over' the cracks from differing author styles; disclosure: I did a substantial amount of the work in that respect here. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 11:01, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
• Support for a nicely collaborative piece, in spite of the fact I was left wanting a better discussion of how human trafficking is linked to tourism. The article highlights a massively overlooked problem; I'm reminded of this piece (which spun out from this case) which anyone interested in the subject should read; a great shame I forgot about it whilst the WN article was being prepared. Excellent collaboration, which is hard in a news context. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 14:37, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
• Support It is a solid article with lots of nice collaboration--Cspurrier (talk) 23:25, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

[OPEN] Wikinews interviews former Salt Lake City mayor and 2012 presidential candidate Rocky Anderson

William's hit a great one here, with a wonderful set of detailed responses that make for a first-class interview. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 01:04, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

• Support  Agreed. --Pi zero (talk) 01:09, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
• Support. This shows that it can be worthwhile letting the interviewee say what they want to say — where they've not got an agenda to pervert the interview process. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 10:16, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
• Support It is an interesting detailed interview with lots of nice photos --Cspurrier (talk) 23:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
• Votestacking as nominator since that seems to be the done thing these days. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 13:14, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Closed as successful, I don't think interviews come much better than this. Craig's comments are quite valid, but how else do you illustrate an article about a voice artist? --Brian McNeil / ^talk 09:00, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Billy West, voice of Ren and Stimpy, Futurama, on the rough start that shaped his life

David S. collected more than a few good interviews; this one, having just re-read it, definitely meets all the criteria I look for in content that should be featured. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 21:32, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

• Support as nominator; uninvolved in production of article. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 21:32, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
• Support Holy crap what a riveting interview. Sourcing practices/standards have changed discernibly, I can't help noting (review mode having become a reflex), but that seems to me to have exactly nothing to do, at least in this case, with FA quality. Leaves the FA criteria in the dust. --Pi zero (talk) 22:36, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
• Easily. Most, maybe even all, of Shankbone's interviews were excellent even against FA standards and this was one of the best. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 23:50, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
• Support well der --RockerballAustralia c 22:05, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
• Neutral It is a very well done interview, but the fair use claims are kind of weak for the images. I do not think this is a problem for an article, but I am not sure we should consider articles for FA status when there are issue like this. --Cspurrier (talk) 23:32, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Closed as successful, although higher participation in these discussions would be better. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 23:39, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Cypriot court clears all of wrongdoing in Greek air disaster

Not so long ago, 10kb or so was a solid FA candidate. I'm a little concerned that the FA bar has been raised somewhat by a string of particularly exceptional articles (Diego's military plane crash, Dendodge's space junk, Brian's cultural tours, my own schizobipolar genetics - all with OR). Nonetheless, I'm going to self-nom what I feel is a solid piece of synthesis and the best English coverage I saw of what should have been a major international story. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 15:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

• Heh. I believe the expression is, "We've upped our standards; so, up yours!" I like this article, and it's pretty well-written. Don't dispute probably better pieced together than the majority of mainstream coverage. But, I'm going to defer voting for now. I'll most likely support, but want to see how the rest of the community reacts to your comments about rising FA quality criteria. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 23:45, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
• Strong support Interesting article, interesting topic. Meets criteria. Overall a good candidate. Also (not that it matters) it's the best, if not only, english language article covering the decision. Cocoaguy^talk_contribs‽ 19:03, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
• Support. Was just waiting to see a 2nd opinion, and largely agree with how Cocoaguy puts this. (And, I'm popping in another long-overlooked candidate above. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 21:32, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
• Support This is solid news coverage. Granted, a lot of great articles might cause the bar to rise a bit; a little bar-raising isn't necessarily a bad thing, within reason, but — ultimately, FA status is not a zero sum game. A deserving article should get listed. --Pi zero (talk) 01:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---