SmashWiki talk:Featured content
Page Name
Why is this page not named "Featured Articles"? Zixor (talk) 03:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Many wikis also have featured images/media. We might as well, so I wouldn't mess with it. Miles (talk) 03:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Propositions
For the suggestions/proposed FC, must we write it out, or can we simply say something such as Final Destination (SSBB)?Smoreking(T) (c) 16:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- Give a detailed explanation for why you think the page is worthy of becoming an FA. Don't give the snippet for Main Page usage. Miles (talk) 16:38, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Questioning Snake (SSBB) page
If Snake's page is considered a featured article, why is there a comment on the page that clean-up of the trivia page is required? Thought featured articles would be clear of any requests like that. --Aximill (talk) 13:46, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- It was added after the page was featured. And other than the trivia section, the page is very high-quality. Miles (talk) 19:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Clean Up
This page is a mess. Someone really needs to clean it up and make it look better. Maybe start actual votes on articles and set it up to look nice with a section per article. For example:
== [[Article Name]] == Explain why nominated. === Support === #Why I support it. === Neutral === #Why I think it may or may not be featured. === Oppose === #Why I oppose it.
that will look much better than the current standard it is. Solar Dragon (Talk) 20:14, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
Also, maybe use the month names as well to split it up even more. e.g. Nominations for October. Solar Dragon (Talk) 20:16, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
- i have put an example up on the page if anyone wants to see how effective it is. Solar Dragon (Talk) 20:22, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
- I tried to fix this system before, and to no avail. :/ BTW, Lucario (SSBB) looks pretty good. Miles (talk) 20:54, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe if we were to make this a forum instead, it will be found more easily. Any more nominations should be changed to that format as well. Solar Dragon (Talk) 05:13, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
- I tried to fix this system before, and to no avail. :/ BTW, Lucario (SSBB) looks pretty good. Miles (talk) 20:54, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
Suggestions
Should there be written standards for featured article? Right now, I don't see any sort of base that we can work on. All we have is "accuracy, completeness, and style", which really needs to be defined. Right now, I don't know what makes an article "accurate" and "complete". Also, what is "style"? It is very vague and I wish these terms are more precise.
Also, would it be a good idea to create an option to remove a previously featured article from the list? Standards can change, so a previously featured article might later be seen as a bad article due to increased standards over time. 
Green Mario 20:17, 30 October 2012 (EDT)
- Some of the featured articles are indeed bad and shouldn't have been featured in the first place (i.e. Ganondorf (SSBB)). However, they were featured nonetheless, and we shouldn't be rewriting our history.
