Forum:CT Archive/Revamp of the good article nomination rules revisited

Several months ago there was an attempt to establish some formal rules for good article nominations to raise it to the standards of our featured article nomination system. This resulted in no consensus and some debate over whether GAs should be complete and only unable to reach FA due to limited source material or whether it was acceptable for them to have broad coverage of a subject but not complete detail (as is currently the case) in order to serve as a stepping stone to FA.

So I'm proposing a compromise. Essentially articles under 1000 words (i.e. those that are too short to become FAs) should be complete in order to be considered good. Articles with enough information to pass the 1000 word mark would only be required to provide broad coverage of the topic's main information so GA could remain as a stepping stone to the complete coverage required by FA. Also, certain aspects that are required for featured articles (personality and traits, quotes, powers and abilities) would only be encouraged here and could be omitted if insufficient information was available.

So, starting with the current FA rules (minus those that don't apply to GA) and adjusting the others, we get the following:

A good article must&hellip;
 * 1) &hellip;be well-written and detailed.
 * 2) &hellip;be unbiased, non-point of view.
 * 3) &hellip;be sourced with all available sources and appearances.
 * 4) &hellip;follow the Manual of Style, Layout Guide, and all other policies on Wookieepedia.
 * 5) &hellip;not be the object of any ongoing edit wars. (Note: This could be reworded based on the outcome of Forum:CT:FAN rule amendment.)
 * 6) &hellip;not be tagged with any sort of improvement tags (i.e. more sources, expand, etc).
 * 7) &hellip;have a proper lead that gives a good summary of the topic if the length of the article supports it. This is essential in articles over 1000 words but may not be appropriate on articles with limited content.
 * 8) &hellip;not have an excessive number of redlinks.
 * 9) &hellip;have significant information, especially a biography for character articles. For articles under 1000 words in length, comprehensive detail is required with all information covered from all sources and appearances. For articles over 1000 words, broad coverage addressing all major aspects of the topic is sufficient.
 * 10) &hellip;be completely referenced for all available material and sources. See Sourcing for more information.
 * 11) &hellip;have all quotes and images sourced.
 * 12) &hellip;provide at least one quote on the article if available. A leading quote at the beginning of the article would be preferred, though not required if no quotes are available. Although quotes may be placed in the body of the article, a maximum of one quote is allowed at the beginning of each section.
 * 13) &hellip;ideally include a "personality and traits" section on all character articles if information is available.
 * 14) &hellip;ideally include a "powers and abilities" section on relevant character articles if, especially for Force-sensitive characters where said powers and/or abilities are stipulated.
 * 15) &hellip;include a reasonable number of images of good quality if said images are available.
 * 16) &hellip;counting the introduction and "Behind the scenes" material, be at least 250 words long (not including captions, quotes, or headers, etc).

I'll be taking this to a vote in a few days, but until then any comments and suggestions would be welcome. Green Tentacle (Talk) 20:44, 7 September 2008 (UTC)