Wikinews:Featured article candidates

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
(Redirected from Wikinews:FAC)
Jump to: navigation, search

This is where the Wikinews community selects new featured articles.

Featured articles should, at a minimum:

  • Have pictures (they should make a good visual impression)
  • Be well-written
  • Cover the news event comprehensively

In addition, we should try to choose articles with these features:

  • Good collaboration
  • Quality original material
  • Better coverage than mainstream outlets

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 successful candidates. See the archive directory for past nominations.
  • There is no upper limit to how long a nomination can be open. Newly-featured articles are often featured on social media, so it is advisable not to close more than two or three in quick succession. Likewise, multiple articles in a single nomination are discouraged.

Candidates[edit]

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

Please list new candidates at the top.

[OPEN] AirAsia jet vanishes over Indonesia, 162 missing[edit]

Dropping in some synthesis of mine, which highlights an intense collaboration to make for a good report on major breaking news. There's no sensible way so many sources on such a large article could have been reviewed had it been submitted in its final condition. What ultimately emerged captures the confusion and emergency scrambling that follows a major disaster unfolding. BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 17:01, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

Votes[edit]

[OPEN] Glasgow cannabis enthusiasts celebrate 'green' on city green[edit]

It's rare for us to manage to get two accredited reporters on the scene, and I'd like to think the result of BRS and I working on this one made sure it's up to FA standards. Most of the photos are Iain's, with his penchant for photographing police officers rather evident. That it was also seized upon by the Signpost over a single word as another reason to demand the project be closed. Bonus!

I'd also like to encourage people to go through the open FACs below. Many of them need either an uninvolved (non-contributing) admin to decide if they're good to promote, or a vote or two more to put them clearly over the line. In the past I've closed and promoted one per week, re-posting it onto Facebook Sunday AM (UK time); this gets high visibility, since it's a rest day for many. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:12, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

  • I'd really like to see this given clear consensus before closing. With two accredited reporters working on it, and likely to vote for promotion, that'll mean more comments/votes than I think we'd usually be happy with. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:12, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I don't believe we've ever had two accredited reporters on the one scene before, though I could be wrong. BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 16:51, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Votes[edit]

  • Support as co-contributor, and nominator. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:12, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Support as co-contributor. It took me a while to settle on this one; ultimately, it's the photos that make it once again. BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 09:53, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Support as reviewer. From the text it's a sound report; as BRS notes, the pictures — with their captions — elevate it to featurable level. --Pi zero (talk) 12:12, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

[OPEN] UK media apparently conflict with Scots law in Mikaeel Kular case[edit]

Great investigative OR imo. This was a story where the mainstream were left in the dust; I don't think anybody else covered it - probably because they were all doing it. There was collaboration with Brian McNeil (talk · contribs) obtaining legal expertise that backed us up, although it was placed in a folow-up. And that was about our investigation being noticed in high places. BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 14:23, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

Votes[edit]

  • Support as nominator/correspondent. BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 14:23, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Support As reviewer, it was deeply satisfying to be involved in helping this piece happen. Featured articles should stand as examples of what news articles should aspire to, and this does. --Pi zero (talk) 15:51, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Support This is why we do Original research. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:49, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Support This article serves as an excellent example of what we should strive for when writing original research. A thoroughly good article. —Mikemoral♪♫ 11:02, 5 February 2015 (UTC)