Wikipedia talk:Featured and good topic candidates/2019

Better definition for rules

I think that the following criterion could be defined more clearly:

The featured topic director, GamerPro64, or his delegate Juhachi, determine the timing of the process for each nomination. For a nomination to be promoted to FT or GT status, consensus must be reached for a group to be promoted to featured or good topic status.

I am going to recommend that we follow the WP:FPC guidelines of:

For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the consensus is in its favor, it can be added to the Wikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets.

Rephrased for our project:

For promotion, if a topic is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the consensus is in its favor, it can be promoted. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator(s) of the topic; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets.

Thoughts? Kees08(Talk) 19:59, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

• A hard ten day limit is going to be very problematic here, given how long it can take to draw attention to even the most well-qualified of topics. I'd suggest a month, as that seems to be how long a normal nomination takes around here. Courcelles (talk) 21:04, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
• Yeah, 30 days seems more appropriate. Kees08 (Talk) 19:21, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
• I like the 30 day limit. From my relatively brief time watching Featured Topic nominations, it seems that they're rarely very controversial. I like this to move things more quickly through the pipeline. 87Fan (talk) 02:04, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

A way to make the process more efficient?

Happy 2019 to those of you that follow the human calendar, or 1001110101001100101 to those that have evolved and only speak binary ;-) I've been through the GT/FT process a couple of times now over the last couple of years and I am wondering if there is a way to make some of these processes easier to do and thus drive up participation? My first note is that the process to add 1 article to a 20 article topic is the same as getting the original 20 article topic approved, that seems overly complicated IMO. Instead of having FT and GT queues perhaps there could be a queue for additions, checked by "a trusted member" and the other queue can be new topics (Feature or Good). If it's passed the first time then a cursory check that the new article fits in, isn't missing anything etc. is 10 times easier to do. Thoughts? MPJ-DK (talk) 01:40, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

I would support this idea, I don't think additions are very often controversial. Just have a separate section that doesn't need as many comments/as much time to be added. Reywas92^Talk 00:18, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

I'd agree that there probably should be a separate and similar queue for additions, and that it probably doesn't need the same FTC process. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 18:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

I agree with the proposal. Kees08 (Talk) 19:14, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you for the feedback so far. My thought was that the heavy lifting that needs group support is the first nomination. MPJ-DK (talk) 22:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

  @MPJ-DK: Were you thinking of doing anything further with this? Kees08 (Talk) 05:23, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

GT to FT?

Hi. The Good Topic Wikipedia:Featured topics/Gascon campaign of 1345 has just had a second of its three articles promoted to FA. I believe that this makes the whole topic featured. Is it OK for me to move it from the list of GTs to the list of FTs, or is there a set procedure? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:03, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Once the other article officially becomes a Featured Article it will become a Featured Topic. GamerPro64 20:08, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

FTR for topics where the number of articles has expanded but the number of GAs/FAs has gone down?

See Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Marvel Cinematic Universe films/addition4. I'm wondering if it's necessary to file a WP:FTRC if, since the most recent update, three new articles have come under the purview of the topic, but none of them have been to GAN (Talk:Captain Marvel (film), Talk:Avengers: Endgame and Talk:Spider-Man: Far From Home), and one of the previous ones has actually been delisted (Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Black Panther (film)/1). I've seen it implied that (for that particular topic?) articles under that heading need to be GA nominated by a certain date, but not necessarily that the topic would automatically be demoted after a certain period of time. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:14, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes you can make a review on the topic. GamerPro64 02:43, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

That's not what I asked, though. My question is about whether I need to open a review, or if the topic automatically demoted once the criteria are no longer met. Technically the criteria were no longer met before you "closed" the most recent addition page, but now on top of that some months have passed since new articles should have been added per the above-referenced "nomination period". Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:58, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes you need to open a review. Just like other review processes. GamerPro64 03:09, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, in most other review processes, the requirement to open a review assumes a formal "close" by a (usually uninvolved) "closer, which doesn't appear to have happened in this case. If FTC is "special", I would appreciate clarification to that effect, rather than simply claiming it's the same as other processes. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 03:16, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Also, could you clarify your comment in relation to the above "nomination period" context? The nomination period has expired on several new articles in the topic, which are currently classed as B, C, C, and C/B respectively. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 03:20, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

I think the best way to move forward here is to go ahead with the removal nomination; I created it, please provide discussion on it as needed. Kees08 (Talk) 07:02, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll try to say something tonight or tomorrow. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 07:41, 15 October 2019 (UTC)