Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Featured log/March 2016
Good topic candidates: view - edit - history
Overview of Katy Perry[edit]
- Contributor(s): Calvin999, FrB.TG, Samjohnzon, SNUGGUMS, Vanished user alaij23jrkef8hj4fiu34t3
We are nominating it as it is a comprehensive topic of popstar Katy Perry. Thank you. -- Frankie talk 18:05, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- I'll support if you can tell me when she's gonna release her next album. :P (regular support, just being snarky) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:16, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- Support for all the hard work and the wonderfully organized articles. —IB [ Poke ] 10:41, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
- Support because you gave yourself and worked really hard to make it happen. Btw, we just need one more article to make a FTC for Gaga!!! GagaNutellatalk 03:06, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - I can't support this nomination because I'd be as such supporting some of my own work and I'm not sure if that's appropriate for me to do. But it's a great topic. Well done. — Calvin999 18:57, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support due to the dedication Snuggums has demonstrated throughout the construction of these articles. More than deserved. pedro | talk 00:03, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support yet another pop singer with a dedicated Wikipedian support, enough to warrant a commended topic. igordebraga ≠ 16:22, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry to burst the bubble, but live performances is not covered in either of the 4 articles. There are 4 different tours and they either have to be all included here or you will have to create a lead article covering them. That has been the precedent for musicians. Nergaal (talk) 17:32, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Where has it been stated to include those? Also, she's had 3 tours (Hello Katy Tour, California Dreams Tour, and The Prismatic World Tour), not 4. Each of these are covered in her main bio. Correct me if I'm wrong, but something tells me that a separate article would be a premature content fork with only 3 tours. Snuggums (talk / edits) 18:51, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- What does live performances have to do with a videography, a list of songs recorded, a discography and an awards list? Nothing. — Calvin999 20:14, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Featured topics/Nine Inch Nails as precedent. I am pretty sure there can be an article discussing her style in live performances. Nergaal (talk) 21:49, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Don't think it's quite a good idea. I don't know what could possibly we have on a list with three concert tours as Snuggums stated above it would be cfork. Besides, Nine Inch Nails' page does not look quite a good example as I don't see anything interesting in the page. It just has the list of shows, which for Perry's ones, can be easily found on their respective pages. We can of course consider creating it when she has some more concert tours just like List of Madonna concert tours. Thank you. -- Frankie talk 22:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Keep in mind that Nine Inch Nails has had more tours and been active for much longer than KP has. Wikipedia:Featured topics/Faryl Smith, Wikipedia:Featured topics/Overview of Lorde, and Wikipedia:Featured topics/Overview of Chrisye give me the impression that only general topics that warrant a separate article need to be included. If there was to be an article dedicated to that for her (assuming it does warrant a separate article), it would probably be in a style similar to List of Beyoncé live performances. I still doubt there's enough for its own article at the moment. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:11, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Don't think it's quite a good idea. I don't know what could possibly we have on a list with three concert tours as Snuggums stated above it would be cfork. Besides, Nine Inch Nails' page does not look quite a good example as I don't see anything interesting in the page. It just has the list of shows, which for Perry's ones, can be easily found on their respective pages. We can of course consider creating it when she has some more concert tours just like List of Madonna concert tours. Thank you. -- Frankie talk 22:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Further notes:
- I am not tying to argue a specific style, and what I am saying is that the live performances part NEEDS to be included in an overview topic of an artist. None of those 3 artists are anywhere near as prolific as Perry is, while Beyonce is definitely more prolific. I don't know much about her, but since she got an award for live performances I assume she is doing ok. My suggestion is to give an attempt of doing a list of live performances, and if it turns out to be too short to be passed at FL it can be passed as a PR. Assuming she won't die anytime soon, such a list will soon be quite long. She has 3 world tours, I saw like 3 tours that she also headlined, and she did a Superbowl show. IMO it is enough for a list.
- somehow A Katy or a Gaga is not covered in her videography; nor is The Matrix (The Matrix album) in her discography.
- unlike any of the artists mentioned above, she does have a significant commercial aspect: 5 perfume brands and a record label.
Nergaal (talk) 23:26, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- "A Katy or a Gaga" is not within scope since she wasn't even seen or heard in that episode and didn't work on production, scripts, directing, or anything of the sort. The discography page is also for material she released as a solo artist while The Matrix is an album she recorded as part of a group. Also not within scope. As for lists of performances, I'll start up a draft and see where that goes. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:38, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- UPDATE: The draft has been started at Draft:List of Katy Perry live performances. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:51, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- I would like to hear from @GamerPro64 and Juhachi: on this matter. -- Frankie talk 09:20, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- The way I've always commented on these sorts of things is that the FTC process is about articles that exist now, not ones that could exist in the future (which is for existing topics which will grow over time). Seeing as how Draft:List of Katy Perry live performances does not exist now, it's really up to consensus whether something like that should be created, although if it is moved to mainspace, then I would agree that it should be in this topic. What consensus would have to revolve around right now is whether Pery's three tours should be included in an overview of Pery. For what it's worth, I believe that individual tours are too specific to be included in an overview topic, so I would not view their omission as violating the FTC criteria, especially if the general consensus here agrees with that view.--十八 10:59, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable. Snuggums (talk / edits) 17:10, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Just to clarify, my comments are based on the criteria explicitly exemplified at Wikipedia:Featured_topic_criteria/Overview_topics#Example_2:_Michigan_State_University. Both the tours and the perfume ventures need to be somehow be represented in an overview topic. Nergaal (talk) 06:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Disagree on perfumes; nowhere near as prominent as her accolades, discography, songs recorded, or even videography, and it's definitely not going to warrant its own article with only 4 items (Purr by Katy Perry, Meow! by Katy Perry, Killer Queen by Katy Perry, and Mad Potion) that didn't really have much impact on her career. Tours is debatable. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:23, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- I am copy-pasting this: If you are considering nominating an overview topic, then you should ensure that every article within the scope of the topic that is not included in the topic is also within the scope of a non-lead article that is included within the topic. Nergaal (talk) 15:20, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Disagree on perfumes; nowhere near as prominent as her accolades, discography, songs recorded, or even videography, and it's definitely not going to warrant its own article with only 4 items (Purr by Katy Perry, Meow! by Katy Perry, Killer Queen by Katy Perry, and Mad Potion) that didn't really have much impact on her career. Tours is debatable. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:23, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Just to clarify, my comments are based on the criteria explicitly exemplified at Wikipedia:Featured_topic_criteria/Overview_topics#Example_2:_Michigan_State_University. Both the tours and the perfume ventures need to be somehow be represented in an overview topic. Nergaal (talk) 06:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable. Snuggums (talk / edits) 17:10, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- The way I've always commented on these sorts of things is that the FTC process is about articles that exist now, not ones that could exist in the future (which is for existing topics which will grow over time). Seeing as how Draft:List of Katy Perry live performances does not exist now, it's really up to consensus whether something like that should be created, although if it is moved to mainspace, then I would agree that it should be in this topic. What consensus would have to revolve around right now is whether Pery's three tours should be included in an overview of Pery. For what it's worth, I believe that individual tours are too specific to be included in an overview topic, so I would not view their omission as violating the FTC criteria, especially if the general consensus here agrees with that view.--十八 10:59, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- I would like to hear from @GamerPro64 and Juhachi: on this matter. -- Frankie talk 09:20, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
I don't think that three concerts and a handful of live performances warrant a separate and stand-alone list. Her concert tours are listed in her biography while live performances are not notable enough to be mentioned anywhere as an artist performs live frequently and it becomes near impossible to keep track of every performance. Take Vidya Balan's featured topic as an example; none of her live performances at award ceremonies are mentioned anywhere. -- Frankie talk 16:10, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- I agree. I don't see the point on commenting on something that doesn't exist and doesn't need to. — Calvin999 16:28, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support I don't believe the concerts need to be included in an overview topic at all. Those are the sorts of things that, if notable, would be included in a discography specific topic, which itself would also include all of the musician's albums' individual articles. This overview topic is not that topic, so I don't see the problem. SilverserenC 07:31, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
There's been no further comment for a week now, and this has 6 supports and 0 opposes. I think this is a pretty unanimous decision that consensus is in favour support. — Calvin999 09:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
- Very true. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:13, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
- GamerPro64 and Juhachi. — Calvin999 09:57, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Featured Topic. - GamerPro64 02:55, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
MediEvil series[edit]
- Contributor(s): Jaguar
With the MediEvil series article promoted to GA, I can finally nominate this to become a Good Topic. This is my first ever GT nomination, so please let me know if I've made any mistakes. All instalments of the MediEvil series are now GA (well, it is a short series with only three games made in the space of seven years). There might be a future move discussion to move the first game to simply MediEvil, and the article on the series to MediEvil (series), but I'm in no hurry. --JAGUAR 13:26, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- While I've never been involved with GTs and what not, I do know that a free image is needed along with the articles (like The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion FT. Also, I do agree that the first game should be simply MediEvil and rename the series to MediEvil (series), but as you said, for another day. Famous Hobo (talk) 15:03, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- An image for the topic is recommended, but it's not a requirement.--十八 22:06, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- All the MediEvil images are non-free, so I don't think I can use a simplified logo or something similar to put in here. I noticed that the The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion FT just used an ordinary sword icon, so if anything, would it be appropriate if I put something like that in this topic? JAGUAR 14:43, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Yeah, a lot of the video game FTs use stylized symbols- swords, "FF" over a crystal, a book, etc. Maybe a skull? File:Skull Icon (Noun Project).svg, File:Process-killed.svg? Also, you need to create a book for the topic, see the other video game GT/FTs for examples. --PresN 18:59, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've added the latter image you suggested because it resembles the protagonist, and is relevant to the theme of the series. I've also created a book at Book:MediEvil series, using other VG GTs for inspiration. JAGUAR 20:22, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Yeah, a lot of the video game FTs use stylized symbols- swords, "FF" over a crystal, a book, etc. Maybe a skull? File:Skull Icon (Noun Project).svg, File:Process-killed.svg? Also, you need to create a book for the topic, see the other video game GT/FTs for examples. --PresN 18:59, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- All the MediEvil images are non-free, so I don't think I can use a simplified logo or something similar to put in here. I noticed that the The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion FT just used an ordinary sword icon, so if anything, would it be appropriate if I put something like that in this topic? JAGUAR 14:43, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- An image for the topic is recommended, but it's not a requirement.--十八 22:06, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Support, once a book is added. --PresN 18:59, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Support - Looks good! It would be good to have any symbol, like a smiling skull since it seems like a funny or cartoony series. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:12, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support. Series is complete. Nice work! czar 00:40, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Support - Very nice. Next step, FA for the articles and then FT. --JDC808 ♫ 16:54, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
1st Army Group (Yugoslavia)[edit]
This is a good topic nomination, consisting of all divisional and larger sized formations directly commanded by the 1st Army Group. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 01:18, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment. Ideally, the GT would be Royal Yugoslav Army, with these army articles all underneath (especially as 5th and 6th army likely won't get sub-topics), but that could be a later parent GT. I'm impressed with some of the other related Yugoslav articles in WWII (including the already-featured Axis order of battle for the invasion of Yugoslavia, Yugoslav order of battle prior to the invasion of Yugoslavia, and Hungarian occupation of Yugoslav territories, and good article Operation Retribution (1941)). I'm not sure if you're working on these Yugoslav articles - if you are, keep it up! But, for the purposes of this GT, I think it's defined enough. I question though, why shouldn't Milorad Petrović be included? He was the commander of the army group. I'm not familiar enough with military GT's though. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:46, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, they are all largely my work. It is not usual for a commander to be part of a formation/unit GT as far as I am aware. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:14, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
- Support seems fine, and I encourage the nominator to expand this topic in the future with 2-6 armies too. Nergaal (talk) 23:30, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support, pending the creation of a book for the topic. --PresN 22:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic.--十八 22:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Supplementary nominations[edit]
2007 Pacific hurricane season[edit]
.svg){kind=link}
- Contributor(s): Cyclonebiskit, TropicalAnalystwx13, 12george1, Hurricanehink, Juliancolton, Seddon, and Titoxd
Pretty straightforward nomination as usual from the WikiProject Tropical Cyclones crew. All notable storms are covered appropriately with sub-articles and are of GA or higher quality. There used to be a few more articles (Alvin, Erick, and Ivo), but a project-wide article purge took place a few years after this season when we established a more restrictive notability policy. Timeline articles are considered optional within the project–in essence, they are a content fork, but done in a specific manner that can be useful to readers such that they fall under WP:SPINOFF–if they exist we'll improve them to featured status for a topic nomination, but if they don't we'll leave it be. --~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 19:53, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Support - Nothing we haven't see before. Do wish you guys could find a guideline on when to have a timeline vs. not, though. --PresN 01:49, 25 December 2015 (UTC)