Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Good log/September 2015
Battleships of Italy[edit]
_starboard_bow_view.jpg){kind=small}
This topic is a joint effort between user:Sturmvogel_66 and me over the past few years, and it is of course a component of WP:OMT. It's actually been complete for quite some time, but I haven't gotten around to putting it up here until now. The topic details all of the pre-dreadnought and dreadnought battleships built or planned by Italy from the 1890s to the 1940s. Thanks for reviewing the topic. Parsecboy (talk) 16:52, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
- Support - another amazing OMT topic. --PresN 17:48, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- Director Comment - This nomination has been going on for nearly a month with only one vote for support. There needs to be more discussion here so we can get a consensus or this will have to be closed as failed. GamerPro64 15:56, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
- Support - per PresN. Hamish59 (talk) 13:09, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Question - FT or GT? An amazing amount of work has gone into this. Do I read the criteria correctly that it says 50% have to be Featured level? Maybe I missed something in the criteria? — Maile (talk) 16:14, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- A GT - there is no separate WP:Good topic candidates, so all nominations fall under the "Featured topic candidates/[title]" format. Parsecboy (talk) 16:41, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Support - I see that now. Well, I reiterate that this is an amazing amount of work since 2013. I've reviewed each article, and I support. — Maile (talk) 16:45, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Support - good representatives of what consistency in a topic should look like among the different articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llammakey (talk • contribs) 13:42, 10 September 2015
- Support. Topic appears complete, and meets the criteria. All editors involved have done an incredible job here, and should be proud of this accomplishment. Great work. – Rhain1999 (talk to me) 02:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. - GamerPro64 16:09, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Interstate Highways of Michigan[edit]
- Contributor(s): Imzadi1979
This is a high-quality, and so far the first of its kind, collection of articles encompassing a single state's components of the national Interstate Highway System along with the related business routes. If the contents of the I-96 subtopic are included with the above, there would be another 5 FAs added here giving this 50% featured content. As my editing continues in the future, the featured percentage will only increase as I have plans to take I-94, I-275 and I-675 to FAC at a minimum. --Imzadi 1979 → 06:15, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
This is also the first of three subtopics about the Michigan State Trunkline Highway System. The other two subtopics on Michigan's U.S. Highways and "plain" state highways will be coming to FTC/GTC later this year as FLCs and a few more GANs are completed. Once these subtopics are promoted, I plan a FTC using the system article and the four lists of roads in the overall system. (Pure Michigan Byway won't have its own topic.) Imzadi 1979 → 06:27, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
- Support - Meets the criteria for a GT. Hopefully more articles in the topic can be brought to FA in the future so this can become a FT. Dough4872 13:43, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
- I think there is no good reason to keep interstate 96 as a separate subtopic. It can be easily included in its entirety within this topic, as it does not appear that it could be a subtopic somewhere else. Nergaal (talk) 20:04, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- Support. Not sure about keeping I-96 as a separate topic or not. In the future, theoretically each interstate could get its own subtopic (provided they had two additional articles). In that case, I think it would serve well to have both interstates by each state as well as each route. This just happens to be the first time this has come up (to my knowledge). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:21, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Rschen7754 23:30, 16 August 2015 (UTC)