Wikinews:Featured article candidates/archive/2

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 1 |
Archive 2
| Archive 3

UK minor faces charges for calling Scientology 'cult' at protest, May 21, 2008[edit]

Well written with images, quotes and excellent detail. Harris Morgan (talk) 15:10, 23 May 2008 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Wikinews interviews team behind the 2,000th featured Wikipedia article, April 13, 2008[edit]

Comprehensive article and interview. Includes collaboration from multiple contributors, good use of images, well-written and well-organized, formatted correctly, original reporting, is an example of reporting exclusive to Wikinews, and has lasting value. Cirt - (talk) 06:38, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pope Benedict XVI visit to the United States begins, April 16, 2008[edit]

I didn't start this article, although I was by far the majority contributor. I did work really hard on this, including uploading images to Commons. I am not nominating this article to aggrandize myself. Rather, I think the resulting article is pretty darn good and could be an example for those who contribute to Wikinews from the comfort of their keyboard. --SVTCobra 02:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - Mmmm, looks like some tasty cake ... Albeit it would have been nice to see some more collaboration from multiple editors together, as well as some OR - but can't argue that this is not a very well-written article, well-organized, and with excellent use of tasteful free-use images. Great work overall. Cirt - (talk) 04:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support because of the ue of free images and the legnth of the article --A101 - (talk) 07:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose No original content. All photos are from the Whitehouse press machine. Small number of contributors (4 or 5). Doubtless, it is well written - just not a "best of". --Brian McNeil / talk 08:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will just point out that those are not requirements but just something "we should try to choose" per the top of the page. --SVTCobra 10:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As far as the 'WH press machine' comment, I will just say that, yes, that is where the pictures came from, but since this was an official state visit, which almost by definition is a staged event, I don't think it would have mattered who 'snapped the pics'. Prior to this event, I posted a request at WN:SOON for collaboration and original reporting and photos. Not a soul responded. But hey, we can soon celebrate the one-year anniversary of Wikinews without any FAs. Hurray! --SVTCobra 02:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The lack of extensive collaboration was why I did not nominate this article - although there would be a delicious degree of irony to make an article about a WP FA featured. This is one I thought should have been featured, along with Wikinews international report: "Anonymous" holds anti-Scientology protests worldwide, which is the biggest collaborative effort to date. The Scientology article has a longer table of contents than some of what we publish. Another one which I worked on and I'd describe as taking on a life of its own is here; this hit the spot for getting people to read the site. --Brian McNeil / talk 08:39, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with you that we do have more content that should be nominated. Virginia Tech shootings is a good example. But while "Anonymous" holds anti-Scientology protests may be a landmark in collaboration, it remains a disaster to try to read from top-to-bottom and I'd hate to be the poor soul that has to try to archive that. But back to the nomination at hand, I submit that it is better than the later Pope concludes visit to US with Mass at Yankee Stadium which has many more free images that are free of White House press machine taint. The reason I say this is that the nominated article was updated as events unfolded while the latter was written the day after. Cheers,--SVTCobra 01:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Popular soap opera 'The Young and the Restless' celebrates 35 years on the air, March 26, 2008[edit]

Out of the interviews I've done, I feel that this one is probably the most suited for featured status. A month of work was put together coordinating the interviews with all three ladies, complete with freely-licensed pictures from the stars themselves. When I have to pick which original reporting piece I'm most proud of, this one is it. Hopefully it is worthy. TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 07:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support as nom. TheCustomOfLife - (talk) 07:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support per nom Anonymous101 :) 17:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support per nom. Cirt (talk) 18:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support OMG TOTALLY. Cary Bass (talk) 00:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support I had this article on my watchlist, so I got an email when the FAC template was added to it :) Per above. Daniel (talk) 00:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Neutral I won't vote against it, as it is high on quality on many levels. However, it has never been fully copy-edited since the "’" character still appears several times. Also, but this is a personal opinion, I find the interested readership for this to be limited. It is a daytime US soap, which to my knowledge means that it is broadcast only in the US and no other English-speaking countries and only during the daytime which further limits viewership, though it is, admittedly, at the tops of the Nielsen Ratings for its category. --SVTCobra 00:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
About the "only in the US" comment, the article clearly states that it is aired in foreign countries such as France, Italy and Germany, and Melody Thomas Scott even remarked about the reception they got while in Turkey. It's definitely not a limited readership issue. If anything, it's an "I'm not interested in the subject matter" issue, and if that's a criteria, I should vote against a lot of articles because some of them bore me to tears. TheCustomOfLife (talk) 01:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, I cannot see on my browser what you're talking about with "", can someone tell me so I can get an admin to fix it? TheCustomOfLife (talk) 01:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I fixed them, they are some odd side effect of how Word or maybe IE handle qoutes I think. I fixed a bunch of them when it was first published, but it looks like I missed a few.--Cspurrier (talk) 01:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Halema`uma`u crater erupts in Hawaii, USA, April 19, 2008[edit]

IMO it is an interesting subject with the good and informative original images and original reporting. The eruption still going on, so the article might make the news for a while.Thank you.--Mbz1 - (talk) 06:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC) Because of the original images it is probably the best article on the NET for this subject.--Mbz1 - (talk) 16:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose although some of the images could be featured on commons --A101 - (talk) 16:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose but the images are very good. --Skenmy(tcw) 17:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • May I please ask you to state the reason for your oppose votes that I would be able to improve my work next time. Thank you.--Mbz1 - (talk) 20:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
IMO, Its not quite long enough for FA status. --A101 - (talk) 08:01, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thank you,A101. Have you seen that I added contest to the article?--Mbz1 - (talk) 13:11, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oh I see you removed my new additition with the summary "no ate edits". I am afraid my English is not good enough to understad what does it mean "no ate edits", but IMO the edits were very interesting and added value to the article.Thanks.--Mbz1 - (talk) 13:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I meant no late edits. It was a typo A101 - (talk) 14:29, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was sure it was a new English idiom, which I did not know. I was about to memorize it and use in some of my edit summaries :-) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mbz1 (talkcontribs)