Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Harry Potter/Improvement/Archive 1

WikiProject Harry Potter Article Improvement Drive

Several users have expressed an interest in trying to improve a Harry Potter related article to a featured article level of quality.

Nominations

Please nominate an article you think the Project's members could focus on, to serve as a model article and potential featured article candidate.

1. Harry Potter --bjwebb 4 July 2005 15:14 (UTC)
2. Remus Lupin -Hoekenheef 14:57, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
3. Sirius Black. I've done a little work on it, but it could be pushed up to FA status with some help. --Deathphoenix 18:55, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
4. Ginny Weasley --drak2 18:38, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
5. Lord Voldemort. Now that Book 6 has been published, there's plenty of information available about both his past and present in the books. As a major character, the article would appeal to non-fans, yet as a mysterious character, the article would appeal to those who are fans. Dmleach 16:32, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
   • Second this nomination. Hermione1980 21:08, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
   • Seconded. Chosen One 21:12, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
   • Seconded. Hoekenheef 21:10, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
   • Seconded. Tjss 12:10 (Seattle time) on 8/11/05
   • <Rubs his hands together> Excellent. --Lord Voldemort ^{(Dark Mark)} 20:31, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
   • Seconded. Krun 19:02, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Improvement Drive

I decided today I wanted to start work on an article to try and bring it to Featured Status, so I came here, thinking that this page had gone inactive. What I hadn't noticed until now was the apparent consensus for making Lord Voldemort the featured article drive article, and I was thinking Harry Potter, but I'm cool with either one. It looks like some good works been done on Voldemort, and it's been tagged as a Good Article. So I'd like to propose what I think needs to happen for the article to reach Featured Status:

1. Citation
2. Completeness
3. Copyediting
4. Peer Review
5. FAC Candidate

1. Citation: I think we need to make sure that the article is completely well cited, that is a very very important criteria for Featured Article status. We need to make sure we use the correct inline citation format, and we also need to find references for the assertions of the article.

2. Completeness: Does the article discuss everything that there is to discuss encyclopedically about Lord Voldemort? What should be discussed? That is a topic to explore further

3. Copyediting: The article text should be flawless. Personally, I feel I'm a pretty decent copyeditor, so that's something I'll be looking at a lot.

4. Peer Review: The next step in the process would be submitting the article to Peer Review. I think we need to get the citations and copyedits in before we take that step.

5. FAC" Once we've had a Peer Review on the article, take it to FAC.

I also propose that we use the article Talk page to discuss the text of the article itself, ie "This sentence should not be in" etc., and use this forum to organize and list out what tasks need to be done: ie, research and verify this assertion or copyedit this paragraph or here's things the article doesn't discuss that it should, etc.

Thoughts? Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 05:40, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

• Sounds like a pretty good deal. We've already had one FA so the more can do the better. -Hoekenheef 11:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Am I that out of it? What got featured? Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 19:20, 9 December 2005 (UTC)