Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Featured log/August 2015

Good topic candidates: view - edit - history

Almirante Latorre-class battleships

Almirante Latorre-class battleship

Featured topic

3 articles

Chilean battleship Almirante Latorre

Chilean battleship Almirante Cochrane

Contributor(s): The ed17, Sturmvogel 66

Clearly in-scope for a featured topic. The second article uses the original Chilean name for the ship because this is a topic about the Chilean battleship class. See also Wikipedia:Featured topic removal candidates/Minas Geraes-class battleships/archive1. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 06:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC) --Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 06:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

• Support per my comments at the FTRC discussion Ed linked. Parsecboy (talk) 20:47, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
• Support Meets the criteria. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:49, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
• Support as per my comments at the FTRC. --PresN 20:09, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
• Closed with a consensus to promote to Featured Topic. - GamerPro64 19:58, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

The Last of Us

The Last of Us

9 articles

The Last of Us: Left Behind

The Last of Us Remastered

The Last of Us: American Dreams

Accolades

Development

Music

Characters

Ellie

Contributor(s): Rhain1999

This proposed topic covers the video game The Last of Us and its subtopics, covering the DLC, remaster, comic book, characters, music, awards, development and directors. I quietly started working on these in October 2014, with major work beginning in January 2015; at the time, we had one C-class article, one Start Class and two Stub. We now have nine seven GAs and two FLs. I believe it meets the criteria. --– Rhain1999 ^{(talk to me)} 07:12, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

• Support. Been waiting for this. Topic appears complete and meets the FTC. Well done. – czar 07:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
• Support. An amazing and complete topic. Will even be better if the game's composer Gustavo Santaolalla is promoted to good article as well. AdrianGamer (talk) 07:46, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that Neil Druckmann and Bruce Straley should be a part of this topic; precedent prior has been that the flow goes Developer->games they developed, not Game->People who worked on the game, unless the developer in question is mainly known for that game. And these two aren't- they've worked on other big name games like the Uncharted series. The game's characters, music, spinoffs/expansions, etc. are clearly sub-components of the "The Last of Us" idea, like subarticles, but their notable developers aren't tied to just this game. I'd be fine with them as component articles of a "Naughty Dog " topic or lead articles of a "Neil Druckman" etc. topic, but not as parts of a topic on just one game they worked on. --PresN 17:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

My 2¢: it doesn't matter much either way. I think precedent has been to keep the devs out of the related game articles, but Straley and Druckmann, as the game and creative directors, are really prominent throughout the entire Dev article and I think make fine subtopics. – czar 22:11, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

@PresN: I think I have to agree with your logic there. If this was a situation like, say, the Metal Gear Solid franchise topic—then yeah, we'd probably want Kojima's article in there. But it's very rare for a person or company to be so closely entangled with their products that this kind of inclusion becomes necessary. I'd even argue that a potential BioShock topic needn't include Ken Levine (game developer), for a variety of reasons. Breaking away from this tradition could become problematic in the future, too, as it's liable to create a slippery-slope situation in which every developer with an article must be included in a topic about their product(s). That's just unfeasible. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 05:49, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll take them out, if that's the consensus, but I just figured that they fit here because The Last of Us is quite clearly their most prominent game (to date). The difference with good topics such as Greg Wohlwend and Asher Vollmer is that they are about developers who almost independently worked on the games within the topic, whereas Druckmann and Straley are two members of a 250-person development team. If they don't fit in this topic, then I think the only reasonable topic for them would be one about Naughty Dog (which I'm okay with, to be clear, but I thought I'd mention it). – Rhain1999 ^{(talk to me)} 06:21, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

It's their most prominent game to date, but there's a difference between "most prominent" and "the game they're almost entirely known for- Uncharted isn't exactly an underground hit of a massively popular AAA series. I would also agree that the way FTopics are set up, Druckmann (for example) would only fit in a Naughty Dog topic, a Druckmann topic (which would have it's own problems and likely wouldn't work), or some sort of absurd "American AAA game designers" topic. That said, a Naughty Dog topic would just be the company, the games list, Druckman, Straley, Gavin, Rubin, and Bisell, so it's difficult but not undoable. --PresN 04:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

@PresN: That makes sense; thank you for clarifying. I'll probably try and tackle the Naughty Dog topic one day, anyway. But, for now, the consensus seems to be that Straley and Druckmann don't belong within this topic, so I've removed them accordingly. If anybody has any objections to this, please feel free to say. – Rhain1999 ^{(talk to me)} 07:07, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

• Support --PresN 14:05, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
• Support as well. Very strong topic—it's a shame that the hard work on Druckman and Straley's GAs isn't being recognized here, but I think it's for the best. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 20:10, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
• Support great work! My only question is, when do you find the time/when do you sleep? ;) Great job! Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:09, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

I take short power naps while I write the articles, and my only other activity is eating; that's my secret. No, but seriously, this topic would not have been possible without the assistance and support of many other editors; that's what kept me going. Not to mention my love for this game. – Rhain1999 ^{(talk to me)} 12:14, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

• Support - This is a fantastic achievement. You should be proud of what you've accomplished here. Great work. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:45, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
• Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. --十八 06:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Supplementary nominations

1. Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/The Last of Us/addition1
2. Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/The Last of Us/addition2

Mana series

Mana series

10 articles

Final Fantasy Adventure

Secret of Mana

Seiken Densetsu 3

Legend of Mana‎

Sword of Mana

Children of Mana‎

Dawn of Mana

Heroes of Mana

Music of the Mana series

Contributor(s): PresN

A year and a half ago, I decided to bring up first Secret of Mana, then Seiken Densetsu 3 to GA status—two of the best SNES RPGs/2D RPGs ever made. Once I had, though, I went ahead and finished off the whole series, bringing 7 articles to GA with 2 continuing on to FA (I had gotten the music article to GA years prior). Now that it's all done, we have here a tidy little Good Topic- a series article, 8 game articles, and 1 music article, for 3/10 FA and 7/10 GA. If I get any more to FA it won't be for quite a while, so I'm bringing the whole group to GTC now. I'd like to thank Kariteh (retired) and Judgesurreal777 (essentially retired) for getting the series article up to FA years ago (recently updated by me), and Lucia Black (retired) for getting Final Fantasy Adventure to GA in 2013. The image is a free icon of a tree that looked the most to me like the Mana Tree, the central icon of the franchise; there isn't a good free image directly from the games available. Thanks all for reviewing! --PresN 18:23, 13 July 2015 (UTC) --PresN 18:23, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

• Shouldn't the title of the main article match the title of the topic? So either (1) rename Mana (series) to Mana series and leave the topic title as is, or (2) leave the article at Mana (series) and rename this topic just "Mana"? I would think that "Mana series" is the common name for this topic anyway and that all sources call it the "Mana series" rather than just Mana, but I also see that the way the topic candidate template works, this topic becomes "Mana series series". Thought I'd bring it up as a recurring issue, but happy to discuss in another forum. – czar 19:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

• The title of the topic doesn't need to match the title of the lead article- they're completely independent. They often don't match, since the article's name is meant for a different purpose than a "topic title". I could rename the topic to "The Mana Shindig" and it wouldn't affect anything else- it's just a name, the template imposes no formatting. The formatting of the lead article in the template doesn't need to match either one, though it's convenient if it does- it's just a piped link. The (rough) consensus for video game topics seems to be: "X titles" if it's just the games in a series, and "X series" if it's every article related to the series (music, characters, etc.). So, in this case, "Mana series" would be correct for the topic title. I could change it to "Mana", but given that Mana links to something unrelated that seems counterintuitive. As to renaming the actual lead article to "Mana series"- that seems to be more a discussion for WP:VG, though I'm not opposed. --PresN 20:20, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

• Support although the designer could be added at a future date. Where does "Mana" come from? Nergaal (talk) 04:59, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

• No idea; I suspect that someone in the design team for Secret of Mana said, "We can't call it 'Holy Sword Legend' in English, that's dumb. What's a cool name for magic? Mana? Sounds good." They didn't worry so much about names back then, not when you had major new series called "Dragon Quest" and "Final Fantasy" to compete with. --PresN 01:13, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

• Support - I'm not dead yet! Life just got a lot busier, but I still love Wikipedia, PresN, and the Mana series. I dreamed that this would become a Good Topic someday, glad I got to see it happen! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:55, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

• Glad you did too! Sorry it took 7 years! --PresN 01:13, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

• Support, but there appears to be enough coverage of the unlisted series titles to warrant their own articles (e.g., Rise of Mana). This said, I wouldn't count them towards the topic right now as I can't find any English-language reviews. – czar 18:20, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
• Support: While there are gaps in the series, this is a good topic as it stands. Having looked at all the articles, I'm confident that this is good enough for it. Congratulations to PresN for bringing the Mana series this far. --ProtoDrake (talk) 08:28, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
• Support: I've been waiting for this one. Everything seems to be in order—full coverage, great icon. I don't agree with some of the others that Rise should be included, since it's a Japan-only mobile game whose independent notability is doubtful. Even if we dredged up Japanese sources, I'm very skeptical that they would be meaty enough to warrant a standalone article. If strong sources emerge in the future, Rise can be added to the topic at that time; right now, it's no big deal. Great work. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 22:41, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. - GamerPro64 17:47, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Supplementary nominations

1. Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Mana series/addition1
2. Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Mana series/addition2
3. Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Mana series/addition3

2002–03 Arsenal F.C. season

2002–03 Arsenal F.C. season

3 articles

2002 FA Community Shield

2003 FA Cup Final

Nominating this topic as it is a complete topic that has not previously been nominated. Any feedback is greatly appreciated. Credit should go to Lemonade51 who did the hard graft. Im merely ensuring his work is recognised! Cheers. NapHit (talk) 19:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

• Considering they finished 2nd, I think 2002–03 FA Premier League would also have to be included. Nergaal (talk) 15:32, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I understand where you are coming from, probably needs a bit more input from other users. I'm unsure myself. NapHit (talk) 15:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't include it, otherwise where would you draw the line? This isn't about the overall Premier League season (or a good topic on the Premier League seasons), but Arsenal's, which is summarised in the lead article. Lemonade51 (talk) 16:19, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

• Support I'd stick with what you've got as it keeps it specific to one team. So think the articles here are those which are important to the topic. Miyagawa (talk) 08:51, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
• Comment - This nomination is reaching its two month anniversary with only one vote for Support. There needs to be more of a consensus to pass this. If not this is going to have to be closed and be re-nominated. GamerPro64 21:38, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
• Support The scope is appropriate and there are no obvious gaps. Lemonade51 (talk) 17:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
• Support - I think all the articles which need to be included are present -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:09, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
• Support Articles included are pertinent to the topic. I think it's right to limit it to competitions won by the club, so I wouldn't worry about including 2002–03 FA Premier League. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:52, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
• Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic.--十八 02:09, 3 August 2015 (UTC)