Changes: Memory Alpha:Featured article reviews

Revision as of 22:31, 13 July 2015

About → Policies and guidelines → FA policies → FA criteria → FA nominations → Featured articles → Featured article reviews

Memory Alpha articles are never truly finished. Even featured articles, examples of Memory Alpha's best work, will over time have to undergo revisions to keep them up to date. Therefore, it's important to review the featured articles from time to time to ensure that these revisions have not only happened, but have maintained the quality expected of a featured article.

If you would like to help by starting a review, a good place to start is featured articles more than five years old, which are listed here. Please make sure you are familiar with the review policy before proceeding, though. For past reviews, please see the archive.

Reviews can be started by beginning a new discussion on this page. If you think that a featured articles' status should be upheld, add it to the "Uphold" section. If you think that the article should be removed from the feature article list, it should be added to the "Remove" section. Either way, be sure to state the reason(s) why you think the article should be reviewed. Reviews should display, and have a link to, the blurb used on the portals, by adding {{Blurb|ARTICLE}} before the discussion.

Sample format:

=== ARTICLE ===
{{Blurb|ARTICLE}}
<reasoning> - <signature>

Once this is done, a notice that the article's status is being reviewed should be added to the article in question by inserting {{far}} at the top of the page, above any other templates except the article type template.

When you are commenting on a review, please take the time to read the entire article before you decide whether to Support or Oppose the motion. When supporting or opposing an article, please use a bullet point (by adding a * before your comment) without any indent so these will be easy to find later. General comments should be indented as usual, and, as always, please sign your nominations and comments with "~~~~".

Uphold

Remove

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{FAReview}}[[Category:Memory Alpha maintenance|{{PAGENAME}}]]
 ==Uphold==
-===[[Ferengi]]===
-{{blurb|Ferengi}}
-A still excellent article that deserves to remain an FA. This one is extremely detailed and has a tremendous amount of background information. --| [[User:TrekFan|TrekFan]] <sup>[[User Talk:TrekFan|<span style="color:#00FF00;">Open a channel</span>]]</sup> 23:16, May 8, 2015 (UTC)
-*'''Support'''. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 08:08, June 1, 2015 (UTC)
 ==Remove==
-=== [[Force field]] ===
-{{Blurb|Force field}}
-This article, while thorough from an in-universe perspective, is lacking any background/production information (of which I am sure there is plenty). Unfortunately, I don't have the time to go through all my sources to add it at the moment so I propose that the article's FA status be removed pending future any improvements that can be made to it. In addition to BG info, I am sure there is a host of apocryphal information on force fields and I just feel that this article is in no way 100% complete and so shouldn't be an FA. --| [[User:TrekFan|TrekFan]] <sup>[[User Talk:TrekFan|<span style="color:#00FF00;">Open a channel</span>]]</sup> 17:16, April 23, 2015 (UTC)
-:I'm inclined to say that this meets the [[MA:FAC|criteria]], since without knowing for sure how much, or the quality of, any information that might be missing, I really can't say that this isn't "''as complete as possible''". That said, I'm not opposing this as yet, but I would rather not remove a FA because of "''what might be''". - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 05:06, April 24, 2015 (UTC)
-That's a fair comment, Archduk3. If I get some spare time over the weekend, I'll traul through my references and make a few scribbled notes for the talk page of the article. I'm certain I've seen BG info relating to force fields though. --| [[User:TrekFan|TrekFan]] <sup>[[User Talk:TrekFan|<span style="color:#00FF00;">Open a channel</span>]]</sup> 15:47, April 24, 2015 (UTC)
-::'''Undecided'''; Truth to be told, I'm inclined to support TrekFan's position for removal. While Duke is absolutely right in his assessment that lack of info in itself is no reason for refusing a FA status as per the criteria, it should also be noted that these criteria were constituted at the beginning of MA when it was primarily intended to be an in-universe POV site. But as everything else, MA has evolved over time, most notably to have production POV info included as BG-info. As a consequence, perusing over the new FA articles added over the last five years, a BG and an aprocrypha section, no matter how trivial, was almost obligatory to have been included; The bar, while not formally but certainly implicitly, has been raised considerably since those early days so to speak...[[User:Sennim|Sennim]] ([[User talk:Sennim|talk]]) 21:59, May 4, 2015 (UTC)
-:While that's generally true, I don't think this subject lends itself to those sections being included though, as the concept of force fields predates ''Star Trek'', and the on screen effects do as well for the most part. There might be some episode specific bg info on the use of, or the visual effect used for, a force field, but I'm not aware of them off the top of my head, nor can I think of a noteworth use of a force field in apocrypha sources that isn't simply "a force field was used." Force fields tend to be treated as light switches in plots, they're either on or off, should be on or off, or need to be switch on or off, but not really noteworthy beyond that. - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 04:51, May 6, 2015 (UTC)
-I have listed some potential sources of what I consider to be very relevant force field background information on the [[Talk:Force field#Potential background information|article's talk page]]. This is just an example. I am sure if I had the time, I could sit down and find many more to expand the article with. Though I appreciate what you are saying Archduk3, I am still of the opinion, the article is not complete and therefore shouldn't be an FA yet. --| [[User:TrekFan|TrekFan]] <sup>[[User Talk:TrekFan|<span style="color:#00FF00;">Open a channel</span>]]</sup> 22:32, May 8, 2015 (UTC)