Jump to content

Wikipedia:Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Scottwiki (talk | contribs) at 06:46, 22 May 2006 (→[[Ethanol fuel]] (13 votes, stays until [[June 5]]): corrected vote by Lord Eru, updated vote total). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcut

The Article Improvement Drive is a weekly collaboration to improve non-stub articles to featured article status. (For stub articles or topics with no articles, see Collaboration of the week.)

/History - For past winners.
/Removed - For removed nominations.
/Maintenance - AID upkeep.

Collaborations
Articles
Science and technology
Miscellaneous

Introduction

To vote or nominate you have to be a registered user with at least one contribution that is not a vote. Any and all articles may be nominated except:

If you wish to help with maintenance of Article Improvement Drive (updating vote counts and such), please see this page: /Maintenance.

{{User AID}} unfolds to

This user participated in the Article Creation and Improvement Drive.




How to nominate

Here is template for nominations: 

===[[ARTICLE]] (1 vote, stays until [[DATE ONE WEEK LATER]])===
:''Nominated [[MONTH DAY]], [[YEAR]]; needs at least 4 votes by [[DATE ONE WEEK LATER]], [[YEAR]]''

; Support:
# (sign with four tildes)

; Comments:
* (put your reason for nomination, sign again)

----
  1. Copy and paste the template to the bottom of the list of nominations on this page and fill it out. It is important to use UTC time; the current time and date now is 22:49, Wednesday, December 18, 2024 (UTC).
  2. Under "comments" section put explanation of what work is needed.
  3. After submitting the new nomination, go to the nominated article and both {{AIDnom}} and {{to do}} on the top of the article's talk page.

How to vote

Sign with "# ~~~~" on the end of the list of the article you want to vote for and then update the vote count in the subhead. Opposing votes are not counted; see approval voting. You can vote for as many articles as you like. If the vote count equaled the "needs at least xx votes by", then add 4 to "needs at least xx votes" and add a week to date in vote count and "needs at least xx votes by" notice.

Example. You encounter this situation and decide to vote:

===[[History of the world]] (23 votes, stays until [[February 7]], [[2006]])===
:''Nominated [[December 8]], [[2005]]; needs at least 24 votes by [[February 7]], [[2006]]''

First you put "# ~~~~" on the end of the list of people who voted for that article and then change the vote count and date in following manner:

===[[History of the world]] (24 votes, stays until [[February 14]], [[2006]])===
:''Nominated [[December 8]], [[2005]]; needs at least 28 votes by [[February 14]], [[2006]]''

How the article is elected

Article with most votes on each Sunday in 00:00 GMT is elected as "The current Article Improvement Drive article". If two articles have same number of votes, the older nominee wins.

The next project article is to be selected on Sunday, May 21, 2006. 00:00 GMT (Template:DAYSTOSUNDAY)

How an article is removed from the list

Articles need four votes per week to stay on the list. If current date (December 18 2024) exceeds "stays until" date of particular article, that article entry is removed from this page and moved to page for removed nominations.

Nominations

Tectonic plate (49 votes, stays until May 21)

Nominated February 5, 2006; needs at least 52 votes by May 21, 2006
Support
  1. APower 03:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. TestPilot 11:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Gflores Talk 16:18, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Samsara contrib talk 20:45, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. TachyonP 01:00, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Joyous | Talk 01:03, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Aerobird 18:02, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. SpacemanAfrica 18:16, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. DanielCD 03:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Durova 17:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. ZeWrestler Talk 23:42, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Newguineafan 22:43, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Lbbzman 16:55, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 01:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Tcie 15:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. --Revolución hablar ver 17:05, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. RJH 18:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Ugur Basak 00:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Jazriel 12:34, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Daniel Collins 17:17, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Kumar 10:13, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. CrnaGora (Talk | Contribs | E-mail) 20:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Tarret 21:23, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. --HolyRomanEmperor 14:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. PDXblazers 01:14, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. --Alik007 12:48, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Mac Davis] ⌇☢ ญƛ. 04:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Mariano(t/c) 07:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. J. Finkelstein 20:44, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. (^'-')^ Covington 07:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Colonel Tom 13:27, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Skaterblo 14:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. CP/M 03:17, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Ante Perkovic 16:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. JosephRJustice 21:34, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Thefourdotelipsis 08:26, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Nick Mks 20:08, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Kingfisherswift 15:58, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. MikeMorley 09:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Vint 03:56, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Jakiša Tomić 23:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. General Eisenhower 00:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. BioTube 20:00, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Dryman 20:29, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Flymeoutofhere 13:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. gadha 01:52, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Daniel 00:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Vanguard 17:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Weatherman1126 (talk) 17:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Removed Votes
  1. 216.56.60.211 by Steven on 01:52, 8 April 2006 (UTC).[reply]
  2. Silence 23:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC) (confused with page for plate tectonics)[reply]
  3. Steven 02:42, 13 February 2006 (UTC) (per above, I rather support a merge)[reply]
  4. Keith 01:16, 11 May 2006 (UTC) (agree with merge proposal- how about something else related?)[reply]
  5. 19:44, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Comments
  • Tectonic plates are a primary study in the field of geology. However, there is only a small article on them. The article could easily be a featured article.
  • I have recently completed studies on Tectonic Plates, and it is center to the theory of plate tectonics and continental drift. I agree, let's get this article fixed up.

Ancient Egypt (55 votes, stays until June 2)

Nominated February 17, 2006; needs at least 56 votes by June 2, 2006
Support
  1. Paul James Cowie 07:37, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Lukobe 08:06, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Steven 23:21, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 19:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Pedro 13:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Spawn Man 01:52, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Mido 17:46, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Hippalus 14:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. siafu 15:51, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. --Revolución hablar ver 17:19, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Mkaycomputer 16:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Vir 19:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Ugur Basak 00:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Jazriel 12:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Phileas 05:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. PDXblazers 06:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Sicilianmandolin 14:57, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. CrnaGora (Talk | Contribs | E-mail) 20:28, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Passdoubt | Talk 08:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Psiphim6 13:59, 27 March 2006
  21. User:Nicholassayshi 14:44, 29 March 2006
  22. Iggle
  23. GfloresTalk 22:48, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Underneath-it-All 15:29, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Lakinekaki 18:06, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Joe Jklin 02:44, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Silence 04:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Connection 23:34, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Colonel Tom 13:39, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Argon233 T C U @  ∠  22:57, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. RexNL 12:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. SunDog 17:44, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Forthright 13:34, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Grigory Deepdelver of BrockenboringTalkTCF 14:17, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Andrew m plamondon 02:52, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. –Tutmøsis · (Msg Me) 18:11, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Ante Perkovic 05:56, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Thefourdotelipsis 08:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Francisco Valverde 17:01, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. chemica 03:25, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Snailwalker | talk 19:13, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. General Eisenhower 00:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Hemmingsen 06:09, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. AndyZ t 13:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Indeed, havin this article improved would be nice. --Tone 23:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Felixboy 18:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Casey14 01:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Dijan 12:29, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Vanguard 17:25, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. —Cuiviénen (talk•contribs), Saturday, 13 May 2006 @ 02:02 UTC
  52. Maurreen 20:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  53. --Bhadani 14:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Cicero Dog 19:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  55. 81.182.171.214 21:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC), and please note that I got here by way of the Ancient Egypt article page. (As opposed to pages mostly for editors, such as lists of "articles for improvement", this "Article Improvement Drive" project, etc.)[reply]
  56. Matwat22 18:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Removed votes
  1. I've removed an anon vote by 69.120.246.50 --Mido 06:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. M.Karpov 19:54, 11 April 2006 (UTC) by Steven on 22:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • There could be few articles more deserving or needing an Article Improvement Drive from the Wikipedia community. And this for one of the most important topics from the ancient world. (Take a look yourself - it's appalling!) This SHOULD be a Featured Article, comprehensively referenced and scientifically-written, and yet it seems to attract all manner of marginal ideas and poor quality contributions. Paul James Cowie 07:37, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Important Question: I've asked this question hundreds of times over the last few months on Wikipedia, and have never gotten a satisfactory, authoritative, or consistent answer on the matter: when it's not used at the start of a sentence or article title, do we properly call it "ancient Egypt", or "Ancient Egypt"? Which is it? Most (though certainly not all) of the ancient Rome articles treat ancient as an ordinary adjective, rather than part of a proper noun describing a time period, but most of the Ancient Egypt articles use the capitalized form (though plenty also use "ancient Egypt"). So which is it?! -Silence 19:07, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • From what I have been able to find (Googled site:.edu "ancient Egypt"), "ancient Egypt" is the correct form (or at least most common among scholars), though "Ancient Egypt" seems to be common as well. ♠ SG →Talk 16:42, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
'ancient Egypt' is the preferred form, IMHO. Colonel Tom 13:41, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Recycling (46 votes, stays until May 28)

Nominated February 26, 2006; needs at least 48 votes by May 28, 2006
Support
  1. PDXblazers 07:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Silence 07:26, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Aerobird 15:21, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Joyous | Talk 16:42, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Terence Ong 10:05, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Hurdygurdyman1234 22:35, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. DanielCD 16:44, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. --Revolución hablar ver 03:44, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Matatigre36 02:46, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Ugur Basak 00:34, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Gflores Talk 06:47, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Jazriel 12:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. ॐ Metta Bubble puff 12:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Hestemand 20:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. CrnaGora (Talk | Contribs | E-mail) 04:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Un sogno modesto 22:31, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Tarret 21:23, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Covington 05:10, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Sicilianmandolin 09:07, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Mkaycomputer 21:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Kajerm 08:19, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Lakinekaki 18:08, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. GoAround 19:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Colonel Tom 13:43, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. --LWV Roadrunner 16:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Jdcooper 01:39, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. IronChris | (talk) 17:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Mazzy 15:17, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Romarin 17:57, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. JosephRJustice 21:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Thefourdotelipsis 08:30, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. --Lostart 19:59, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Bertilvidet 15:32, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Vashti 20:25, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Alvin6226 03:53, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. -Reuvenk[T][C] 20:32, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. General Eisenhower 00:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. TreveXtalk 16:11, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. helix 16:14, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. LdyDragonfly 07:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Pruneau 16:33, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Keith 01:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Skaterblo 21:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. --Richman271 01:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Clay 03:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. __earth (Talk) 15:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Removed votes
  1. • The Giant Puffin • 12:55, 13 April 2006 (UTC) on Steven by 00:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC), no link to user.[reply]
Comments
  • Silence says this article needs to be expanded more than paper recycling. I say lets fix 'em both. PDXblazers 07:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sounds like a fantastic idea. No reason we can't work on paper recycling too if this gets nominated, as a major sub-article also in need of work. -Silence 07:26, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • It'd be nice to go into greater depth about the types, methods, and complications. And, at the expense of stirring things up (and Wikipedia doesn't always stir well), maybe a little on "controversy"? Some have suggested (not that I would cite Penn and Teller's Bullshit! as an authoritative source) that recycling everything but aluminum (and maybe glass) costs more than it saves and pollutes more than it prevents. At any rate, this could be an absolutely first-class article if we gave it a little wikipedia love. Kajerm 08:19, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
'Controversy' sounds like a good idea. A non US-centric approach would also benefit this article; there are many different approaches taken globally. Colonel Tom 13:46, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematics (57 votes, stays until June 22)

Nominated March 9, 2006; needs at least 60 votes by June 22, 2006
Support
  1. Durova 15:24, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. The Tom 23:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Mkaycomputer 23:32, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Vir 01:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. RexNL 18:28, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Silence 18:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Skinnyweed 00:35, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Ugur Basak 00:46, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Steven 22:35, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Un sogno modesto 23:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Hgilbert 01:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. --Jaranda wat's sup 04:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. --darkliighttalk 19:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. -MarSch 12:47, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. CloudNine 14:53, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. --Hippalus 10:35, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. CrnaGora (Talk | Contribs | E-mail) 00:04, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Soo 22:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Carabinieri 16:11, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Pointlessness 17:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. VegaDark 07:31, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Covington 18:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. GfloresTalk 18:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. CG 15:03, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. --Richard Clegg 10:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Xxxxxxxx 16:09, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Sicilianmandolin 03:33, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. K-UNIT 03:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Nach0king 21:14, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Knuckles sonic8 22:21, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Feezo (Talk) 09:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. --HolyRomanEmperor 21:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Grigory Deepdelver of BrockenboringTalkTCF 14:09, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Mhernandez 16:20, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Salix alba (talk) 12:07, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Joe 05:55, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. estavisti 14:37, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. getcrunkjuicecontribs 20:50, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Percy Snoodle 14:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. sharpdust 15:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. JosephRJustice 21:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Nick Mks 20:09, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Amalas 20:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. badpazzword 12:13, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Ante Perkovic 07:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Osbus 20:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Mostssa 02:25, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Jakiša Tomić 23:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 18:30, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. helix 16:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Foxjwill 02:26, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Snailwalker | talk 19:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Jersey Devil 18:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Tom 17:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Clay 00:28, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Terence Ong 10:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Espresso Addict 03:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Removed votes
  1. Removed anon vote by 24.20.158.96 - Jazriel 08:37, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. 150.250.84.214 18:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. 150.250.43.239 22:09, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. General Eisenhower 00:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. serbiana - talk 03:36, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Okinawadude 16:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. PDXblazers 06:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • According to Wikipedia:Most visited articles this is #5 among Wikipedia's most visited pages, yet it isn't a featured article, nor is it an FA in any of the other 81 language versions of Wikipedia where it appears. As of this writing the talk page has been quiet for a month. It's already at good article status. Good organization, great image use. Needs a better introduction and citations. Suffers from single sentence paragraphs. This is really a cornerstone of any encyclopedia. Let's prioritize it. Durova 15:24, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Epic of Gilgamesh (32 votes, stays until May 29)

Nominated March 27, 2006; needs at least 36 votes by May 29, 2006
Support
  1. Silence 21:07, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Un sogno modesto 22:33, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. BorgQueen 23:19, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Paul James Cowie 13:32, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Sicilianmandolin 18:04, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Playstationman 22:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Jazriel 10:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Ugur Basak 02:03, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. QuixoticKate 19:09, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. CloudNine 17:28, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. CG 05:02, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Biccamera 14:35, 4 April 2006
  13. J. Finkelstein 00:22, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Mhernandez 18:07, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Keenan Pepper 04:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. ×Meegs 05:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. SpeedyGonsales 17:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Argon233 T C U @  ∠  22:53, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Grigory Deepdelver of BrockenboringTalkTCF 10:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Yadin twelve 21:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Clinkophonist 17:31, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. --Mir Harven 12:15, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. JosephRJustice 22:16, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Steven 22:31, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Sannya 15:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 04:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. David McCabe 06:41, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. General Eisenhower 00:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. --Asterion talk to me 07:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Dijan 12:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. --Bhadani 14:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Cicero Dog 19:49, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Removed Votes
  1. Lstep 14:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC) by Steven on 22:31, 18 April 2006 (UTC)(only 1 contribution)[reply]
Comments

Dungeons & Dragons (27 votes, stays until May 22)

Nominated April 3, 2006; needs at least 28 votes by May 22, 2006
Support
  1. Covington 08:12, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Lewis 08:50, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Cazcaz 14:32, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Sherool (talk) 07:27, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. InShaneee 22:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Spenser 23:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. SorryGuy 04:27, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Colonel Tom 13:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. SWTrilman 20:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Fairsing 05:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. George Le Chat 10:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Wackymacs 11:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Genesis 08:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Percy Snoodle 14:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. JosephRJustice 23:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. mad_cat_42 23:34, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. --Хајдук Еру ( Talk || Contributions) 06:32, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Seahen 21:58, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Jonas Karlsson 22:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. 02:59, 27 April 2006 (UTC) -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrnaGora (talk • contribs) . --SasaStefanovic • 16:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Captainktainer * Talk 11:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Caf3623 02:11, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Foxjwill 02:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Robbstrd 18:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. BOZ
  26. Wubb 20:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Deepak 04:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Removed Invalid Votes
  1. 129.21.113.162 23:47, 12 April 2006 (UTC) <-- Thank you for your interest. Unfortunately, the rules state that one must be a registered user to vote. If you could register and re-vote, that would be great. (^'-')^ Covington[reply]
Comments
  • Great start for a game that was the precursor to many video- and role-playing games in use today. A very popular game in its own right. Needs 1) general cleanup, 2) fix criticism - organize, reference, and add a section about criticism within the DnD community i.e. "powergaming", and 3) breaking down (or not, please discuss). With a more work, we can make this a featured article. Covington 08:12, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • <sings> "Gary Gygax was my mentor, now I could teach him tricks; I've an armour class of over +10 and a mental age of 6" - kidding, of course. The article's not bad, but it would be nice to see it as a featured article. Colonel Tom 13:37, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New York City (27 votes, stays until May 27)

Nominated April 8, 2006; needs at least 28 votes by May 27, 2006
Support
  1. --Whoshiwoo 14:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. estavisti 17:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Steven 17:55, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Un sogno modesto 21:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Howrealisreal 17:13, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. PDXblazers 05:11, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --Manwe 08:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. CloudNine 12:34, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Jdcooper 01:39, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. —Cuiviénen, Wednesday, 19 April 2006 @ 01:45 UTC
  11. Descent 17:45, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Fantom 14:08, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Mkaycomputer 19:29, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Alexandrewb 15:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. 1652186 19:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Duran 01:08, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. CrnaGora 03:04, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. └ VodkaJazz /  02:28, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Captainktainer * Talk 12:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Flymeoutofhere 13:07, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. John R Murray 22:45, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Yauhin 21:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Vanguard 17:26, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Osbus 16:48, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Caponer 01:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Terence Ong 10:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Duran 19:43, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Removed votes
  1. Richard the Lion-Hearted 4:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC) by Steven on 20:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC) (no such user)[reply]
Comments
  • The largest city in the English-speaking world.But in French Wikipedia and German Wikipedia it's more particular than in English Wikipedia.In French and German Wikipedia New York City is featured article, but in English Wikipedia it's not.Is it possble?We MUST improve it!
  • Greatest city ever - needs to be the Greatest article ever! --Descent
  • I think NYC could easily be judged as a good article already, in which case it would go to the other listing. └ VodkaJazz / talk ┐ 02:28, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I may be biased, but New York City is one of the most important topics, and one of the easiest to draw a lot of loving attention to.

William Shakespeare (45 votes, stays until July 1)

Nominated April 8, 2006; needs at least 48 votes by July 1, 2006
Support
  1. (PDXblazers 18:59, 8 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]
  2. estavisti 20:23, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Sicilianmandolin 00:32, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Daniel Collins 01:47, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. dr.alf 02:19, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. CloudNine 09:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. MyNameIsNotBob 10:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. HAM File:Icons-flag-wales.png 21:34, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Feezo (Talk) 09:05, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Alabamaboy 17:00, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. The Singing Badger 20:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Sxeraverx 02:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. M.Z. 11:51, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Argon233 T C U @  ∠  22:49, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Caponer 01:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Fotinakis(talk) 19:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Vint 16:33, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. --G Clark | Talk 01:15, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. estavisti 21:43, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Thefourdotelipsis 09:47, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. --darkliight[πalk] 10:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. --Mir Harven 12:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. SpeedyGonsales 12:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Ildkugle 20:43, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Grigory Deepdelver of BrockenboringTalkTCF 19:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Amalas 20:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. chemica 03:23, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Snillet 06:33, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Ksong12 01:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Genesis 15:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. --Manwe 09:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. CrnaGora 03:12, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. David McCabe 06:40, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. VegaDark 00:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. --RockyMM 15:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. -Reuvenk[T][C] 20:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. BigBlueFish 10:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. JONJONAUG 20:54, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Maartenvdbent 17:26, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Jazriel 11:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. M A Mason 13:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. FrancisTyers 01:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Terence Ong 10:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Espresso Addict 02:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Removed Votes
  1. EdmondDantes 16:26, 13 April 2006 (UTC) by Steven on 23:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC) (No such users)[reply]
  2. RainyDay17 13:24, 21 April 2006 (PST) by Steven on 21:09, 21 April 2006 (UTC) (no other contribution)[reply]
  3. Iivmcmxci 23:50, 30 April 2006 (UTC) by Steven on 20:42, 11 May 2006 (UTC) (no other contributions)[reply]
Comments
  • Arguably the most important author in the history of the English-speaking world. This must be FA, and with a little work and reorganization, I think we can get it there. PDXblazers 18:59, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed. This article is close and with a little work would be there.--Alabamaboy 17:18, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • This page is so close... please help! The Singing Badger 20:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • So near and yet so far... the Style section is what's letting this article down. It fails to give a sense of what makes Shakespeare Shakespeare, instead giving us some rather irrelevant info about the medieval morality plays. I just hope that putting this article on the AID encourages some perceptive user to include something about the hallmarks of Shakespearean style – we really don't need anything more on the subject of his homosexuality/Catholicism/being Francis Bacon. HAM File:Icons-flag-wales.png 10:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • You know what, I think I can help with the style section, but it may take some time. I can bring in a more technical analysis of Shakespeare's style including things like meter, syllabic count, and various other things which have to do with "quantification". I just finished a third year course in university which centers on examining Shakespeare's works from a variety of ways (historical, thematic, psychological with an emphasis on critical reading. If any of you think I should go forward with this, I'd really like to hear it. Or perhaps anything else me or anyone else can help to make the Shakespeare section even better. EdmonDantes 01:24, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Go for it! If you feel that your knowledge can contribute positively to the article, definitely do it. Just don't surprised when your writing gets "edited mercilessly" by others. ;) — Fotinakis(talk) 19:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please go for it. The info about morality plays and all was merely intended to be a starting point providing initial context for a large section on his style but nothing has happened to the section in months. The irritating thing about the article is that the "trendy" sections on religion and sexuality get the most edits (and have to be kept from growing too large) while the more substantive sections wither away from lack of editorial imput. So pleas, edit away! --Alabamaboy 11:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article is of a limited scope: not bad in gossip and trivia, but sadly lacking in what is most important in Shakespeare: the creation of dynamic & "larger than life" personalities, essentially modern treatment of all the life's central themes: jealousy, sex, ambition, will-to-power, parental love, ....Mir Harven 12:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus (22 votes, stays until May 25)

Nominated April 13, 2006; needs at least 24 votes by May 25, 2006
Support
  1. Grigory Deepdelver of BrockenboringTalkTCF 09:02, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. rossnixon 11:41, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Gilraen of Dorthonion AKA SophiaTalkTCF 17:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --CTSWyneken 17:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Jaranda wat's sup 21:44, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --HolyRomanEmperor 15:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. —Brand 15:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Avala 22:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Homestarmy 03:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. --MonkeeSage 16:08, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Un sogno modesto 22:25, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Caponer 00:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Caf3623 02:05, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. CrnaGora 03:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. General Eisenhower 00:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. American Patriot 1776 01:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. John R Murray 22:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. 1652186 19:41, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. --Asterion talk to me 22:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Skinnyweed 19:54, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Хајдук Еру (Talk || Contributions) 02:44, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Duran 19:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Removed
  1. 24.218.72.42 02:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Evman2010 22:13, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Eshcorp 11:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Petrichor 17:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1. Rick Norwood 21:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. TestPilot 21:41, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such thing as an "Oppose" in approval voting, as used at AID. —CuiviénenT|C, Sunday, 14 May 2006 @ 16:40 UTC
Comments
  • We're currently working on improving the historicity section, including the second paragraph of the introduction, which is related. We may need more about the viewpoints of the Apocalyptic Prophet Model a la Albert Schweitzer, the Jesus Seminar, and the cultural and historical background of Roman-Era Israel.
  • The chronology, Life and Teachings, and Pauline Christian views sections could also use some feedback.
  • Any other recommendations for improvement would also be useful.
  • I agree. This is one of the most heavily-edited articles on Wikipedia; AID should be used efficiently to help give attention to neglected articles. If you need help from the community at large resolving a certain dispute, then just file an RfC, but Jesus clearly is already getting plenty of attention relative to its importance. However, keep in mind that this is a support-only vote; an "oppose" section won't be counted. -Silence 09:11, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • There were disputes back in February but now, not so much. If the article were still under dispute, I would not have nominated it for the AID. We are asking for additional attention with the goal of driving improvement of the article. After all, isn't driving improvement of an article the point of the Article Improvement Drive? Grigory Deepdelver of BrockenboringTalkTCF 10:06, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, and as I just said, we have to choose articles that receive insufficient attention, not ones that already get plenty of editing and improvement. Our objection has absolutely nothing to do with whether there are content disputes, it has to do with the fact that there are only 52 weeks in a year and there are waaaay too many articles that are even more important than Jesus, in much, much worse shape than Jesus, and receive infinitely less editorial attention than Jesus. So, while I don't object to its being nominated here, and may even contribute to the article a bit if it's AID is successful, I don't feel that it merits or requires AIDing at this point, even though I agree that it, like most articles, has a lot of deficiencies. -Silence 10:16, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are related articles that don't receive as much attention as the main Jesus article and may require more work. I may nominate them in the future, but I thought I'd start at the top. As for the non-related articles that need more attention, well, we can wait for our turn like all the other nominations in the queue. Grigory Deepdelver of BrockenboringTalkTCF 10:21, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • But you didn't start at the top. Starting at the top would be starting with Christianity, the largest religion in the world and one of the most important ones in modern society, yet, unlike Bahá'í Faith and Hinduism (and formerly Buddhism), not a Featured Article (and receiving much less attention than Jesus regularly does). Heck, Christianity isn't even a "Good Article" yet, unlike the Judaism and Islam! That's an article I'd support, even though it too is a very heavily-visited article. -Silence 03:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If someone were to nominate Christianity, than I would vote for it. You'd have a point about starting at the top if I had nominated Christian views of Jesus. I didn't, though. I nominated Jesus. This article isn't just about Christianity. It's also about the historical views, the Muslim Isa, those Hindus who see Jesus as a guru or an incarnation of Vishnu, the new age A Course in Miracles program, &c, &c, &c and a variety of other perspectives. It isn't just about Christianity. Grigory Deepdelver of BrockenboringTalkTCF 12:26, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's true, the article isn't just about the Christian Jesus. But lets not be coy about this: obviously Jesus' main objective claim to fame is as the founder (of sorts) of Christianity. If someone nominated Gautama Buddha when Buddhism was in much worse shape and I pointed out that Buddhism might be a better place to start from, would the nominator be justified in pointing out that Siddhartha has had an enormous amount of influence outside of Buddhism, and that he also plays a role in other religions, such as Hinduism? Sort of, but it would be missing the point on a technicality of sorts; obviously you nominated Jesus primarily because of his importance to the largest religion in the world today, Christianity. Your own user page indicates that you are a devout Christian. So, let's be real here. :) -Silence 16:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Yes, I am a Christian (Lutheran, to be precise). However, I have not been involved in the Christianity article, and I wouldn't know where to begin to create a to do list for that article. Grigory Deepdelver of BrockenboringTalkTCF 17:54, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. In any case, though I don't think this is the best choice for AID, I'll at least concede that it's better than most nominees. Good luck with the article, whichever way it goes. -Silence 08:15, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with SOPHIA. In particular, we've done significant work on the "Life and Teachings" and "Religious views" sections (although we should check these for redundancies), but we haven't done as much for the historicity section. More attention has been paid to the second paragraph of the intro, which is meant to summarize the historicity section, than has been paid to the historicity section itself. Thus I'm driving to improve the historicity section of the article. We should also ask for additional attention to the overall balance of the article (some have said that it leans too far towards religious perspectives). I think that's appropriate for an AID drive. Grigory Deepdelver of BrockenboringTalkTCF 08:52, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • With the news of the Gospel of Judas coming out earlier this week, some attention should be devoted to alternate views of the life of Jesus. Perhaps some extra time should be spent on alternate gospels. Furthermore, a lot of literature has recently come out on historical interpretations of the life of Jesus. The book "The Dynasty of Jesus" is one such example that discusses possible explanations for why Jesus ate bread on Passover (it was the day beforehand), what the transformation of the early church did to Jesus' ideas, and an alternative view of historical documents on the virgin birth that point to a father named Partena. An interesting addition might also be the recent CNN article about the cold conditions that might have frosted over Galilee for Jesus to walk on ice instead of water, though it is not too convincing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])
I think the gospel of Judas would go in a "Gnostic views" section since, you know, im pretty sure they were the ones who wrote it (In addition to several other works, they really were churning out stuff fast to discredit Jesus to my knowladge), don't we already mention the gnostics? :/ Homestarmy 03:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gnostic section, maybe also a mention in the historicity of the texts section. GOJ has been in the news, and people will be looking for it. Grigory Deepdelver of BrockenboringTalkTCF 12:26, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why were the votes of (Evman2010 (talk · contribs), Eshcorp (talk · contribs), Lord_Eru (talk · contribs) and Petrichor (talk · contribs) all removed? No reason is given. Arch O. La Grigory Deepdelver 00:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jimi Hendrix (16 votes, stays until May 20)

Nominated April 15, 2006; needs at least 20 votes by May 20, 2006
Support
  1. RomeoVoid 18:26, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Jaranda wat's sup 19:16, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Thefourdotelipsis 09:45, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. -Benbread 11:57, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Kingfisherswift 15:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. RENTAFOR LET? 02:26, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --Manwe 09:30, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. CrnaGora 03:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Silence 15:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. PDXblazers 18:17, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Vint 03:13, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Osbus 22:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. LearningKnight 16:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. TheFountainhead 20:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. ASimplePlan 15:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Carolaman 23:55, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • "In his brief four-year reign as a superstar, Jimi Hendrix expanded the vocabulary of the electric rock guitar more than anyone before or since." Hendrix is one of the most important and highly regarded musician of all time, and needs to have a featured article. RomeoVoid 07:29, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Silence supported this article in a earlier nomination. RomeoVoid 16:54, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (14 votes, stays until May 28)

Nominated April 30, 2006; needs at least 16 votes by May 28, 2006
Support
  1. Paul James Cowie 17:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. estavisti 05:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. helix 16:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Funper 20:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Noetica 07:18, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. nkayesmith 23:24, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. M A Mason 14:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. ♠ SG →Talk 16:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. CrnaGora 21:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Shawnc 10:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Melaen 16:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Espresso Addict 02:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Lakinekaki 17:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Removed votes
  1. ColtsMelloBR 04:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC) by Steven on 16:45, 7 May 2006 (UTC) (no other contributions)[reply]
Comments
  • Surely, in the 250th anniversary of the great man's birth, the article for Mozart should be elevated to Featured status. Paul James Cowie 17:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article is now in pretty good shape, being regularly maintained and polished by several competent editors. It is quite comprehensive, and well furnished with appropriate links and references; its comparative level of accuracy is certainly quite high, now. Noetica 07:18, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • "fell by the wayside....." What do you mean? How can a Featured article degrade? Doesn't Wikipedia ensure that articles don't deteriorate instead of improve? Mandel 20:24, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • No, the article hasn't degraded, but it was promoted to a featured article long ago, under a previous set of less stringent criteria, and it was felt that it no longer quite matched up to the featured article current criteria. --RobertG ♬ talk 10:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Computer Hardware (10 votes, stays until May 21)

Nominated April 30, 2006; needs at least 12 votes by May 21, 2006
Support
  1. Foxjwill 17:58, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. SmintsAreDelicious 18:02, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. JONJONAUG 18:06, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. (^'-')^ Covington 07:30, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. RJH 21:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. BorgQueen 17:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Steven 22:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. CrnaGora 21:48, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Ace of Risk 16:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Хајдук Еру (Talk || Contributions) 23:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • This article, being the core article for computer hardware, needs to have some bulk and organization which, at the moment, it lacks almost completely. It consists almost entirely of links and has very little text. It definitely needs work. Foxjwill 17:58, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Black Death (8 votes, stays until May 22)

Nominated May 1, 2006; needs at least 12 votes by May 22, 2006
Support
  1. Paul James Cowie 06:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Asterion talk to me 01:06, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Jaranda wat's sup 22:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Steven 22:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Stbalbach 14:38, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. TestPilot 21:42, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Okinawadude 16:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Teodorico 08:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Nikola Tesla (13 votes, stays until May 29)

Nominated May 1, 2006; needs at least 16 votes by May 29, 2006
Support
  1. (^'-')^ Covington 07:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. estavisti 11:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Хајдук Еру (Talk || Contributions) 15:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Kris12 21:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Over-long, full of goo and dribble, probably suffers from a residue of Reddi-isation and Tesla-philia. Badly in need of improvement William M. Connolley 19:54, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --Asterion talk to me 01:05, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Steven 22:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. BabaRera 07:39, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Ante Perkovic 13:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. --Aleksandar Šušnjar 21:43, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. --Krytan 21:38, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. CrnaGora 21:42, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Lakinekaki 17:07, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

October Revolution (9 votes, stays until May 26)

Nominated May 5, 2006; needs at least 12 votes by May 26, 2006
Support
  1. Jersey Devil 05:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Paul James Cowie 08:59, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Хајдук Еру (Talk || Contributions) 16:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Zocky | picture popups 02:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. CrnaGora 21:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Asterion talk to me 12:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Casey14 23:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Kimchi.sg 13:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Zserghei 18:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • I couldn't believe the state this article was in when I saw it. This is definately an article that needs to be featured material but instead is very short and undescriptive.--Jersey Devil 05:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Franz Liszt (7 votes, stays until May 21)

Nominated May 7, 2006; needs at least 8 votes by May 21, 2006
Support
  1. Funper 18:33, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. M A Mason 13:40, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. James Barlow 18:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Mak (talk) 22:29, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Shawnc 10:26, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. RexNL 09:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. CrnaGora 00:59, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • This man is the father of romantic music, such as Liebesträume No 3 and Hungarian Rhapsody No 2. There are houndreds of hundreds biographies of Liszt and over thousand letters written by Liszt, but despite this, his article is only 3 pages long.
  • Certainly one of the most underrated composers, about whom many myths and preconceptions dating back even as far as the 1830s still exist. It's only recently that these are being challenged and the importance of Liszt and his place in music history is being fully recognised. The article goes some way to showing just why so many people are so passionate about the man and his music, and why he deserves to be recognised and not just a footnote in other articles; the many contributors have done a great job so far, and yet it needs that extra push to make it the featured article it ought to be. I urge you all to at least glance at the article and come to some kind of decision. Thanks, M A Mason 12:15, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ethanol fuel (14 votes, stays until June 5)

Nominated May 8, 2006; needs at least 16 votes by June 5, 2006
Support
  1. Scottwiki 03:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Un sogno modesto 09:41, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Daniel 23:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. BorgQueen 05:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Steven 21:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. CrnaGora 21:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Okinawadude 16:16, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Asterion talk to me 12:57, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. __earth (Talk) 17:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Howrealisreal 18:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Anlace 19:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. (^'-')^ Covington 21:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Duran 19:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Lord Eru 03:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Louvre (11 votes, stays until May 30)

Nominated May 9, 2006; needs at least 12 votes by May 30, 2006
Support
  1. HAM File:Icons-flag-wales.png 22:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. PDXblazers 23:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Paul James Cowie 05:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Felixboy 20:09, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Steven 21:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. CrnaGora 21:59, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Okinawadude 16:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. RexNL 22:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Kimchi.sg 13:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Empty2005 13:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Duran 19:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Comments
  • Absolutely! The biggest museum in the world with some of the most important works of art in the history of man! Also, with the Da Vinci Code movie coming out soon, this page could see more hits. PDXblazers 23:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

University of Coimbra (4 votes, stays until May 24)

Nominated May 10, 2006; needs at least 8 votes by May 24, 2006
Support
  1. Page Up 12:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Gameiro 13:01, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Teodorico 23:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Asterion talk to me 22:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC), maybe a matter of translating from the Portuguese wiki[reply]
Comments
  • It is one of the oldest universities in Europe (the oldest in Portugal) and one of Portugal's most important higher education and research institutions. The current article is already a reasonable effort, but should be improved. Page Up 12:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Women's rights (9 votes, stays until June 1)

Nominated May 11, 2006; needs at least 12 votes by June 1, 2006
Support
  1. Felixboy 17:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. M A Mason 17:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. KillerChihuahua?!? 18:12, 11 May 2006 (UTC) Yes please![reply]
  4. Okinawadude 16:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. (^'-')^ Covington 00:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Pruneau 14:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. —CuiviénenT|C, Wednesday, 17 May 2006 @ 16:51 UTC
  8. Clay 00:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. CrnaGora 01:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Asia (5 votes, stays until May 26)

Nominated May 12, 2006; needs at least 8 votes by May 26, 2006
Support
  1. Maurreen 03:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Steven 23:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. __earth (Talk) 17:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Kimchi.sg 13:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. CrnaGora 01:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

David Ben-Gurion (9 votes, stays until June 4)

Nominated May 14, 2006; needs at least 12 votes by June 4, 2006
Support
  1. Paul James Cowie 20:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Asterion talk to me 20:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC), as long as NPOV is carefully watched.[reply]
  3. Gail Wynand 22:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. serbiana - talk 22:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Jersey Devil 05:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Kimchi.sg 13:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. -Reuvenk[T][C] 23:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. --Manwe 08:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Duran 20:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Hugely influential as the first Prime Minister of Israel, serving two terms and playing a major role in the Independence and early development of the Jewish State.... Ben-Gurion definitely deserves to be elevated to Featured Article status. Paul James Cowie 20:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of Southeast Asia (7 votes, stays until May 29)

Nominated May 15, 2006; needs at least 8 votes by May 29, 2006
Support
  1. __earth (Talk) 17:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Casey14 23:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. (^'-')^ Covington 00:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Kimchi.sg 13:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Steven 22:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --Terence Ong 10:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. CrnaGora 00:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Southeast Asia as a region is rich in history, from prehistory to great mediaeval kingdoms to modern time characterized as "economic miracle". Unfortunately, contributors so far are only interested in contributing to individual countries of the region and in a way, are ignoring the big picture. This does not describe how countries of Southeast Asia are interconnected with one another, especially with growing regionalism second only to of the European Union. An improvement drive will correct that the neglect of the "big picture". __earth (Talk) 17:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a Southeast Asian American myself I would especially like to see some improvement in this article. Also, in the United States, Southeast Asian history (other than the Vietnam War) is virtually ignored. At Wikipedia, this article could benefit from the help of many more interested people. Let's fix this up. (^'-')^ Covington 00:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marxism (6 votes, stays until May 29)

Nominated May 15, 2006; needs at least 8 votes by May 29, 2006
Support
  1. Harris0 21:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Хајдук Еру (Talk || Contributions) 23:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Jersey Devil 02:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --darkliight[πalk] 10:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Zserghei 18:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. CrnaGora 01:21, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Very important topic.

1968 Democratic National Convention (4 votes, stays until May 29)

Nominated May 15, 2006; needs at least 8 votes by May 29, 2006
Support
  1. Sarge Baldy 21:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Хајдук Еру (Talk || Contributions) 01:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)\[reply]
  3. Harris0 01:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Jersey Devil 02:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • This is pretty embarassing. One of the most important demonstrations of the 1960s is practically summed up in two paragraphs, with very little detail. It doesn't give a good sense of what happened there at all, and Pigasus isn't even mentioned. Sarge Baldy 21:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neanderthal (3 vote, stays until May 24)

Nominated May 17, 2006; needs at least 4 votes by May 24, 2006
Support
  1. --Francisco Valverde 17:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. CrnaGora 00:56, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Steven 15:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Niccolò Machiavelli (4 votes, stays until June 1)

Nominated May 18, 2006; needs at least 8 votes by June 1, 2006
Support
  1. Paul James Cowie 13:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Scottwiki 17:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. RexNL 21:54, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Duran 19:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Lordi (1 vote, stays until May 28)

Nominated May 21, 2006; needs at least 4 votes by May 28, 2006
Support
  1. Manwe 22:17, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Blade server (1 vote, stays untill May 28

Nominated May 21, 2006; needs at least 4 votes by May 28, 2006
Support
  1. Skaterblo 23:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Cuban Revolution (1 vote, stays until May 28)

Nominated May 21, 2006; needs at least 4 votes by May 28, 2006
Support
  1. Jersey Devil 07:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • No references, no talk what so ever about the urban resistance in Havana (which many say were actually more useful than the guerrilas in Sierra Maestra), and very much in need of expansion. Very important historical event that should be a "featured article".--Jersey Devil 07:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the Four Seasons (Vivaldi) (1 vote, stays until May 28)

Nominated May 21, 2006; needs at least 4 votes by May 28, 2006
Support
  1. -- Drini 03:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • This is one of the major works of Baroque music, probably the most recorded concerto. Yet the entry is almost a quote of poems (which should be at wikisource), links to media files and many subjective prose: "The Four Seasons are superb tone opems".
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Article_Collaboration_and_Improvement_Drive&oldid=54487396"