On this page, I want to suggest a new procedure for "featured articles" and related things. I am doing this on a user subpage because the various existing discussion pages regarding this topic are already very cluttered.
- Memory Alpha:Featured article policies
- Memory Alpha:Featured article nominations
- Template:ArticleOfTheWeek (the "Article Of The Week" (=AOTW) is chosen from all featured articles).
...and their discussion pages.
- Number of self-nominations
- There's a huge number of self-nominations. Articles that are exclusively or mainly written by one person are nominated by that person (from |here).
- Number of featured articles in general
- There are discussions about the overall number of featured articles. There shouldn't be too many relative to the number of articles in the database (from here).
- Sort of pages being nominated
- Some complain about the types of pages being nominated (episodes, minor characters, ...). Some even reject article nominations based on the type (from here).
- Formal criteria missing
- There might be a need for a formal definition of what exactly is necessary to make an article a good article (from here). Related to that, objections should contain valid a reason (from here).
- Number of simultaneous nominations by one user
- This number should probably be restricted (from here).
What if... we just combine the procedures for FA nomination and AOTW voting? It might sound a little radical first, but what else is an AOTW than an article featured very prominently?
I suggest the following procedure:
- A new voting page is created, similar to Template talk:ArticleOfTheWeek. On this page, sections for each week of the year are created, each containing a subsection Article suggestions and a subsection Votes.
- In the Article suggestions subsection of each week, each user may suggest one page.
- In the Votes subsection of each week, each user may vote for one page (and, of course, may change his vote as often as he likes)
- At the end of a week, the article with the most votes becomes the new "Article of the Week" and also gets added to a permanent "Hall of Fame". In case of a draw, the article with the highest number of different non-IP contributors is chosen (Alternatively: the oldest article?).
- If no article gets more than three(?) votes, last weeks article is kept (Alternatively: last weeks second place, if that one got more than three votes).
- All articles that have been AOTW in the past get added to the Hall of Fame.
- Featured article status is kept for the moment, but will be removed in the long run.
- "FA nomination" stops immediately, "FA removal" continues and stops once all FA's are removed.
- In the Hall of Fame, both the "current version" and the revision at the time of AOTW nomination should be linked.
- A template stating that "this article was the Article of the Week" (+DATE) should be added to the article.
- As always, votes should be restricted to non-IP users with a specified minimal number of contributions.
- An article should not be allowed to be suggested two weeks in a row. That way, we prevent the suggestion of the same articles again and again.
- This procedure, while radical, would solve most of the problems with the current FA nomination procedure - especially the number of nominated and featured articles, but also the number of simultaneous nominations by one user and even the type of pages being nominated.
- All discussion about the article would stay on the articles' talk page. If you would support an article if something was changed/got added, mention it on the talk page or just change it yourself. That way, the nomination period doubles as a sort of "peer review".