Over the course of the last couple of years I've been sporadically working on Star Trek articles, and this is the first time that an entire season has been taken to Good Article status, so hopefully this should be the first Good Topic for the Star Trek Wikiproject. The featured article comes from a time prior to my work on the project. --Miyagawa (talk) 17:18, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I wish this was a The Next Generation season instead... Nergaal (talk) 01:40, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
All of TNG season one is at GA except for the season article itself. So hopefully soon enough. Miyagawa (talk) 17:23, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just to add to my previous comment - the season article is now at GAN. Once that passes, I want to go through and tidy the rest of the season one articles; they were all my earliest episode related work, and I want to bring them up to a better standard prior to submitting this as the second GT for the topic. Miyagawa (talk) 17:28, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks good to go! --PresN 18:42, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Looks complete, wow this is a lot of work! Mattximus (talk) 22:22, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support I reviewed "Daedalus" early in my GA reviewing career. It ended up great, and upon casual inspection of the other articles, they appear to be of the same quality. I know the extent of Miyazawa's work, and it is really nice to see it being rewarded with a potential GT. Johanna(talk to me!) 22:43, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support I reviewed "United" earlier in the year. It is a comprehensive and complete coverage of the season. Great work! Aoba47 (talk) 01:49, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. - GamerPro64 15:15, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
All of the articles are good, and there shouldn't be any additional articles, mostly due to lack of information. However, it's not inconceivable that 3B and 4A could get them, especially if local sources are used. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:03, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment where is the book? Titoxd(?!?) 09:22, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support - looks good, now that the book is up. --PresN 18:43, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Director comment - It's been a month since a comment was made here. Gonna need more of a consensus before promoting this topic. GamerPro64 17:58, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Meets all the criteria. GA for everything long enough for a stand-alone article. Everything else (linked together, book, etc.) is in place. GaryColemanFan (talk) 04:30, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. - GamerPro64 18:53, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This potential Good Topic for Compilation of Final Fantasy VII has come together over a large span of time: it includes articles for the three games and two multimedia projects officially included in the Compilation. The earliest GAs are Crisis Core (Judgesurreal777) and Last Order (WhiteArcticWolf): Dirge of Cerberus is a more recent edition, while Advent Children needing to be renominated quite recently after the original GA promotion was reexamined and removed. Before Crisis and the main Compilation article were done by me within the last year or two. The Compilation stands as its own entity and a Topic for Final Fantasy VII is delayed until work on the articles for its Characters and the in-production Remake, so grouping it into a general Topic for VII and the Compilation would be impractical. Many thanks to everyone who contributed to the creation of this Topic, and to those who review this nomination and decide its fate. --ProtoDrake (talk) 13:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support - It's great to see a topic like this finally emerge, it's a nice clean topic that is fully covered by this nomination. Great work everyone! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 14:25, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why not have a complete FF7 topic with the main game and music also included? Nergaal (talk) 19:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Nergaal: Because the "Characters" article is yet to become a GA, and the Remake article is for a game that will not be fully released and able to be brought to GA for some time. --ProtoDrake (talk) 07:56, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I think the underlying caveat here is whether "compilation of FF7" needs its own article. Most of its content is coming from its component articles or from the series article, and a quick skim showed only three titles that even mention the compilation as a concept. On balance, I think the concept stands better and is more useful for our readers separately than reduced and merged. So while I agree that the FF7 topic would be preferable (and will eventually subsume this topic), the Compilation of FF7 sufficiently stands on its own and, from my understanding of the topic, looks complete. (Note that you can still nominate for GT while a game has not been released—the article just needs to be peer reviewed—see my Action Button Entertainment topic re: Videoball). czar 14:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If the compilation article didn't exist, the main FF7 article would be fine as the lead of this topic while keeping its current name. Nergaal (talk) 04:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I agree that a full FF7 topic would be better, but this works just fine on its own.--IDVtalk 16:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support, as one of the original reviewers. Final Fantasy articles never fail to impress me, and this is no exception. Looking forward to seeing the FF7 topic. – Rhain☔ 00:11, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support This looks good to go. JAGUAR 11:23, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. --十八 21:21, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Storm Front"
czar 14:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)