Kept

edit

I am placing this topic up for review due to failure to meet to meet criterion 3.b as Roads to Vegas is not up to at least Good Article status. GamerPro64 16:40, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will review for GA. Adabow (talk) 21:50, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Supernatural (season 2)

edit

I feel that this topic is incomplete. Sure there are no other articles relating to the second season on Wikipedis, but that's just it. This topic only has the season proper and two episode articles, one being the season finale even though the other is not for the season premiere. If you have a topic that is for an entire season and its missing a huge chunk of it, it just screams that it fails 1.d in the criteria. GamerPro64 00:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Independiente (Ricardo Arjona album)

edit

The retention period for Metamorfosis World Tour ended on June 9, so this topic no longer satisfies criterion 3(b), so the topic should be demoted until that article gets up to at least GA.-- 07:49, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Slipknot discography

edit

After the release of Slipknot's 2012 album Antennas to Hell, this topic no longer satisfies criterion 1(d) for completeness, so the topic should be demoted until that article gets up to at least GA.-- 07:45, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think I nominated the topic initially, and I don't have the energy to work on the new album. Considering previous examples of GTs I suggest/propose to change the scope of the topic to just the studio albums. Nergaal (talk) 00:52, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No longer meets GT criteria: two articles in the scope, "Breathe on Me" and "Touch of My Hand" are not qualified articles. (talk) 10:12, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Touch of My Hand" is now redirected to In the Zone, while "Breathe on Me" is now a GA. (talk) 02:37, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Final Fantasy XII

edit

I recently brought up this issue at WT:VG here regarding this topic's status, but didn't get much of a response, so I'm bringing it here. Basically, I realized that while Characters of Final Fantasy XII is a GA and in the topic, two branch articles from that article, Vaan and Balthier, are not at least GAs and are obviously not included. These two articles were recreated in October 2009, about a year after this topic was first approved, and it looks like they were overlooked based on an assumption which User:PresN stated in the above linked thread: I guess the idea is that since Characters of Final Fantasy XII is in the topic, that Vaan and Balthier, as subarticles of that list, don't need to be directly included.

But I find this argument to be a little shallow when, as I noted, WP:VG has two current FTs which include separate character articles in their topics so as to satisfy WP:WIAFT criterion 1(d) for completeness: Wikipedia:Featured topics/Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow and (perhaps ironically, being another Final Fantasy topic) Wikipedia:Featured topics/Final Fantasy VIII. So I believe this topic should be delisted until Vaan and Balthier are brought up to at least GA and added to the topic per criterion 1(d). Also, the GA Fortress may also need to be added to the topic, but perhaps that is for a later discussion.-- 22:01, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both articles look really good. A few easy to fix issues are there such as proper ref citation. Fortress is already at GA. I suggest fixing these articles within the week and nominate them for Ga. If they fail, then we remove it as a featured topic. If we remove it now then itll just leave more work.Lucia Black (talk) 22:20, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I agree that the Fortress article must be added to satisfy completeness, but I think the character articles are a grey area. The featured topic criteria is vague on this point, and it has been understood to this point that these topics are focused on the game articles themselves. Perhaps we have to first come to a consensus on what the correct formatting should be, and it probably goes like this; if there is a "characters of" article with two or more character articles, that should be a separate topic, and only the characters of article should be present inthe games article with a link to the separate character topic. If there is one character article, it should be added to the topic for completeness sake.Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I am finding it difficult to accept this reasoning. How can you suggest that a list of all the characters of a given game is more necessary for inclusion than individual character articles from the same game? Just because it covers more content? If this isn't an example of cherry picking, I don't know what is. Why should the project treat only this topic differently when there are two current topics that have character branch articles?-- 00:07, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I agree with you, we should not treat articles differently. I am saying that this has been a gray area till now, since topics have been promoted both with and without their individual character articles. I am saying that we should find a consensus position, and my proposal is that if there are at least 3 character articles (1 characters of article and 2 individual characters, they should be a subtopic, and only the characters of article should be in the games topic. Otherwise, they should all be a part of the games topic. If this reasoning makes sense, I think a nomination should be started to add the Fortress article and define the criteria at the featured topics criteria talk page. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:15, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Judgesurreal777's reasonings. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:09, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So what you're saying is to have this FTRC closed, then put them up for GAN which may take weeks leaving a void in the topic and then do a supp nom even though there was an FTRC that would've taken care of it all. I'm sorry but as a delegate, and you mentioning these two articles should be part of the topic in the first place which doesn't make sense, I think the review should stay up until the GANs are taken care of. GamerPro64 01:26, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you're saying that a potential outcome of this FTRC is that those two character articles are added to the FT (i.e. duplicating the functionality of a supplemental nom), then by all means, keep the FTRC open and do that. What I don't want is multiple drawn-out bureaucratic processes when one would suffice. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:30, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • The GANs for final fantasy related article go pretty fast. I think we are moving to fast just to un-feature the topic. There is still the question of editors believing the character articles is too indirect to be part oof the topic.Lucia Black (talk) 05:40, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nominated Vaan for GA while we are at it. I haven't contributed too much to Balthier so I'm unsure about it.Tintor2 (talk) 19:42, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Balthier has been nominated as well (not by me). --PresN 03:23, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Vaan now a GA; I've updated the box above to match the proposed expansion. --PresN 17:40, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BBC Sports Personality of the Year

edit

The last time I tried doing a review on this topic, User:Rambo's Revenge pointed out that BBC Sports Unsung Hero Award was added due to criteria 3c and would have to wait til the tenth time the awards been given out. Now, three months after it did back in December 2012, the page is not up to snuff and its grace period has ended. And since Rambo is inactive hopefully someone could take care of the list. GamerPro64 20:03, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the FLC is here. It's going okay. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done BBC Sports Unsung Hero Award was promoted to FL a few minutes ago, so unless there are wider concerns, I guess we can consider this FTC as job done! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Demoted

edit

Naruto manga chapters

edit

I am nominating this topic for FTRC on the grounds that it fails criteria 1.d as the article List of Naruto chapters (Part II, volumes 49-current) is not part of the topic and is not up to Featured List status. GamerPro64 01:39, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Even though there has been one comment on this, its been a month and no action has been taken. As such, I am Closing with consensus to have the topic Delisted. GamerPro64 01:01, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No Doubt albums

edit

After the release of No Doubt's 2012 album Push and Shove, this topic no longer satisfies criterion 1(d) for completeness, so the topic should be demoted until that article gets up to at least GA.-- 07:35, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

StarCraft titles

edit

I am putting this topic up for GTRC as it failed criteria 3.b due to StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm not being at least up to Good Article status and the grace period to reach it ended. GamerPro64 14:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Don't think I should dig this topic deeper, but if someone tries to get Heart of the Swarm to GA, they need to get a least a PR out of StarCraft II: Legacy of the Void as well. igordebraga 18:30, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bloc Party albums

edit

I am placing this topic up for FTRC as it fails 1.d of the Featured topic criteria as it is missing Four (Bloc Party album), which itself is not at least Good Article status. The album came out on August 20th, 2012 so it had a long time to get cleaned up. GamerPro64 14:15, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I must say you timed this remarkably well - thanks to three coursework deadlines and a metric fuckton of work I will not have the time nor the energy to contest this removal. I'll see if I can work on Four but I can't promise anything. (Not to mention that Rafablu has been rather absent of late and it is he that knows more about writing these articles..) — foxj (in the wild) 15:11, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Its been over a month since this review has started, as well as only four edits were made to "Four" during that time period, I am now Closing this and having the topic Delisted. GamerPro64 18:21, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Halo media

edit

I am placing this topic up for FTRC as it fails criterion 3.b due to articles Halo 4 and Halo 4 Original Soundtrack are not at least Good Article. It should also be noted that while Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary is not part of the topic either, it is currently at GA status. GamerPro64 02:06, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • For what it's worth I'm happy to add Combat Evolved Anniversary to the topic as part of this process rather than going through a separate one for it. GRAPPLE X 02:36, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Halo 4 is not part of the Good topic, so why does its status matter? You could argue that by 1d, Halo 4 should be added to the topic and therefore it would fail 3b, but I think you'd need to form a consensus to add Halo 4 to the topic before jumping to the fail step. It's not as though one of the already chosen articles lost its GA status at GAR. It does not seem necessary to me that the topic include Halo 4, and the topics that are included seem sufficient for good topic status. I oppose delisting the topic as it stands, and I oppose adding Halo 4 to the topic. But as an alternative, perhaps the topic could be limited to the "Halo trilogy" or the "Halo trilogy and related media"? --Odie5533 (talk) 00:59, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    The point is that Halo 4 should be part of the topic given its stated scope. The proposed "Halo trilogy" idea seems needlessly narrow, especially as the parent article for the topic, List of Halo media, includes the missing articles. GRAPPLE X 01:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]