Wikipedia:Proposed very good articles/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archived requests[change source]

Ana Ivanović[change source]

Ana Ivanović (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

I've pretty much worked this one out single-handedly. It's comprehensively referenced, illustrated and provides thorough coverage of the aspects of her career so far. She's a notable subject since she is now the best female tennis player in the world, and won the last major tournament, the French Open. I'm sure that it pretty much meets all the criteria set out in the requirements for VGA. I'm happy to take any suggestions on what would ensure this is one of Simple English Wikipedia's best articles. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Charles Spurgeon[change source]

Charles Spurgeon (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

This has been a on-going project for me. I have made 100+ edits to it (as well as other editors who did work hard on it too). With that, came much work. The whole article is referenced (and none of them were copied from en:WP). It contains none of these tricky words. I have used Microsoft Word, as well as several other places to copyedit and check grammar, spell-check, etc. The article is long enough, has several interwiki links, a very good "Other websites" section, has categories, images, important terms are linked and there is no red links left, these are all requirements for VGA. The only other is the requirement is 2. comprehensiveness. As far as that goes, it is very simple. It may still have some complex words or long sentences, but few. It may (or may not) be fully ready, but I have decided to throw it out there and see what you all think about. Is it ready, or what needs to be done. Thanks -- ApEtSIG 06:49, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Moulin Rouge![change source]

Moulin Rouge! (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
I have been working hard on this article to make sure that it meets the criteria for a VGA, and I definately think that it does now : - ) IuseRosary (talk) 11:54, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Pipe organ[change source]

Pipe organ (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

I would like to propose that this article be put up for VGA status because of the fact that it has no red links, has good references (although could use a little more), has a good Other websites section, has great pictures, and based on the number of votes it has received for its request to become a GA, that it will be a GA. I would therefore like to propose that Pipe organ become a VGA. Razorflame 21:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it is quite ready yet. Although it meets the reference requirements, for that long of an article, I would expect at least ten references. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 22:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I second that. It is not appropriate for an article with such a long section dedicated to history of the subject, to only have three references. - Huji reply 20:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
The unnecessarily capitalized words throughout the article need to be fixed to make it very good. · Tygrrr... 20:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I have decided that this article is not yet ready for VGA status, so therefore, I am withdrawing this request. Razorflame 16:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Coffee[change source]

Coffee (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
This article meets all ten of the criteria for a VGA (excluding #10 because it hasn't been voted on yet). Thamusemeantfan 15:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
But there is a red link left (#6). --Cethegus 23:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I fixed that. Thamusemeantfan 01:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Goat Rock Beach[change source]

Goat Rock Beach (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

When I originally nominated this article, there were two issues: 1. Too many red-links, and 2. Not long enough. Since the article was failed, I fixed both errors by adding more links and beefing up the article by adding a new section. Feel free to comment the improvements. -- Thamusemeantfan 01:51, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Looks better in my opinion. But we should have other editors decide too. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 02:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Lisa Simpson[change source]

Lisa Simpson (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

I think this article may be even better than Homer Simpson, a VGA. Thamusemeantfan 03:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Oppose Un-simple. JetLover Bam! 04:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for nominating my work for VGA, but the article is only halfway done to worth the VGA tag. I just left it suddenly to promote this article to VGA status instead. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 05:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
The article looks like a good start, but for my (personal) liking, the sentences are a litle long. If we made more sentences, each sentence would be shorter (and therfore easier to understand). --Eptalon 22:11, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Not to mention that there are too many redlinks. Also I think that we should break down the section Personality and Role in the Simpsons into shorter sections and subsections. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 03:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks to all who commented. Critique is good for an article. Since all are opposed, I will archive this one now. Thamusemeantfan 02:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Rings of Neptune[change source]

Rings of Neptune (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Another Neptune-related article seems ready to be ready for the VGA tag. It also follows most of the criteria. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 04:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

List of Neptune's moons[change source]

List of Neptune's moons (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

This article seems ready to warrant the VGA tag. I think that it probably fits 8 of the criteria. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 03:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Chris Thile[change source]

Chris Thile (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

I just created this article last night, and is a part of the Nickel Creek articles. Meets most (eight) of the criteria. -- Thamusemeantfan 01:19, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Tropical Storms Ingrid, Jerry, and Melissa and Hurricane Karen[change source]

Tropical Storm Ingrid (2007) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Tropical Storm Jerry (2007) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Tropical Storm Melissa (2007) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Hurricane Karen (2007) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

I would like to propose these 4 articles for VGA. Basically, they have at least one public domain image, sources and references, external links, good information, and follow at least more than half of the enitre VGA criteria. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 06:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Meteorological history of Hurricane Katrina[change source]

Meteorological history of Hurricane Katrina (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

I am now almost done with the article, just finishing up the last touches with it. So far, it has rich information, a lot of references, several images, and follows like 7 or 8 out of the criteria for VGA articles. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 01:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Very nice article. Great images and references in particular. However, I must say that it may need to be simplified and change some complicated words. Otherwise, very nice. Thamusemeantfan 01:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. You are also welcomed to help and simplify the article if you feel it is needed:) --§ Snake311 (T + C) 05:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Lake Urmia[change source]

Lake Urmia (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

The article was started by User:Yegoyan and I completed the article. I believe, after adding the redlinks, it is a good candidate for VGA status. Nevertheless, I'd like to have your comments about it. - Huji reply 21:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be a good article. But maybe some expansion on the history section? will do it. --Yegoyan 21:25, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, the information on the History section of English Wikipedia are not well sources. I'll be looking for better sources, and try to add relevant information to the article. Thanks for your assistance. :) - Huji reply 21:27, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm... the sections are kinda short and several sentences are choppy. Needs more information to warrant the VGA tag. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 01:16, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I have given some thought to this article and decided that if no consesus is reached within December 8 to improve the article or make it fit the VGA criteria, I will remove the {{pvgood}} template and will end its VGA procedure. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 00:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Oppose-I oppose this from gaining VGA status because the sections are too short. Please expand the sections; maybe rerun this in a while. -Razorflame 01:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I also oppose. The three sections are all very short, and the third section is just a list. I think that it doesn't even compare to articles such as Evolution and Geisha. -- Thamusemeantfan 03:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I agree with them generally. Such comments give us a way to know what to add to an article to make it a future VGA. I'll try to have a look at it and make some additions when I get some time. - Huji reply 17:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Goat Rock Beach[change source]

Goat Rock Beach (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

I wrote this article, so my opinion is biased, but I think it is well written, no red links, good references, and good images. The length is a little short, but nothing too bad. Thamusemeantfan 04:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Muhammad[change source]

Muhammad (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

After working a little on this article, I think it is well written and deserves the VGA title. Thamusemeantfan 02:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Buddhism[change source]

Buddhism (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

This article has a great simple definition, and I think needs a promotion to VGA. Thamusemeantfan 02:43, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Timpani[change source]

Timpani (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

A featured article on the English Wikipedia, and has good references, no red links, and is well written. -- Thamusemeantfan 01:22, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Violin[change source]

Violin (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Another very well written article, which meets most of the criteria (eight out of ten) -- Thamusemeantfan 01:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Mali[change source]

Mali (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Originally proposed by User:Jpbarrass. A first reveals a few red links, but nothing too serious. --Eptalon 22:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it is worthy of the VGA title. Thamusemeantfan 02:35, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Music[change source]

Music (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

One of the first Simple Wikipedia articles. It meets most of the criteria, and I think it may be ready for VGA status. Thamusemeantfan 03:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Nickel Creek[change source]

Nickel Creek (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Although this page is very new (six days), I think it meets most of the criteria. I just need someone else to edit it. I think it is at VGA status. Thamusemeantfan 02:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

4 Vesta[change source]

4 Vesta (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting possible until November 22, 2007

I have throughly reviewed the article which looks very good based on my opinion, although I would like to have other editors to also have a look on it:) --§ Snake311 (T + C) 02:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Minor points: don't think the astronomy category is necessary, and why is there a link to en-wiki? ...Aurora... 04:23, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
The astronomy caetgory covers all topics and articles that is based from or comes from astronomy, from the article astronomy itself to the lowest-level topic articles that branch from the main topic astronomy. Also if you are talking about the link to en wiki, it is an interwiki. Other than that, I don't see any other en wiki link elsewhere. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 05:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
1929 Kollaa and Dawn link to enWP. --rimshottalk 14:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Mumia Abu-Jamal[change source]

Voting possible until November 22, 2007
Mumia Abu-Jamal (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Based on English wikipedia article, which is 'A-class' there. Language has been simplified throughout. Lengthy. Referenced thoroughly. Please count my vote!Ephemereal 01:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Its a very decent article. Haven't seen such a great article compared to most of our current VGAs:) --§ Snake311 (T + C) 01:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
This is a very good written article. It is a bit too long, in some view, and as you know, a long article is harder to read and navigate, so maybe we can shorten some parts. - Huji reply 21:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

List of Arizona hurricanes[change source]

List of Arizona hurricanes (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on November 11, 2007

Here is another tropical cyclone-related article created by me. Hope you can polish it up a bit before moving it to the voting section. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 21:25, 28 October 2007 (UTC) who cares

Putting the table to a side, the rest of the article is not enough detailed I think. Maybe no more detail is needed on a "list" article, but then maybe lists are not good candidates for VGA.
I will add some redlinks, and perform some copyediting. - Huji reply 21:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
If you take a look at the en wiki's version of the article, they don't really have much information either. But I might add in a little bit of more info if I can. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 04:48, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
I have also filled in the redlinks you've created except for gust which I removed because on the en wiki, gust refers to the Japanese game software developer. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 04:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
In this case, I suggest you create the "gust" article (with the meaning used on our article) to both our wiki and En WP, and of course add the required disambiguation pages on En WP. - Huji reply 11:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Endorphin[change source]

Endorphin (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until November 1, 2007

Huji has asked me to review the article to see if it could be proposed as a VGA article. I found the article nicely-written and felt that it had a potential to become a VGA. Also the article has been written by Huji, which seemed to have beaten most of my VGA articles in quality (which i am impressed with). --§ Snake311 (T + C) 23:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the complements! As we have in our criteria, no one writes the best article, so changes made by other editors are welcome to Endorphin article. Best, - Huji reply 18:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
If you fill in the remaining redlinks, I'll move it towards the voting section. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 18:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

The Simpsons shorts[change source]

The Simpsons shorts (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until October 28, 2007

While I copied the list of shows from en wiki; the rest of the article has been simplified, with no red links left. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 23:41, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Neptune (planet)[change source]

Neptune (planet) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until October 24, 2007

I re-discovered an article I once wrote by clicking through the Random articles button and came upon this. Its a decently written article, but has too much red-links left which seems overwhelming for one person to do alone. I pasted this article on the Peer review page, although no one bothered to review it. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 03:42, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Mouthpiece (brass)[change source]

Mouthpiece (brass) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until October 15, 2007

I created this article and I've been doing some work on it. It's not crazy in terms of references, and I believe it has one red link (Marching band). Just looking for some opinions, as I think it's now ready, ( arky ) 19:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Its a nicely written article, but its references sure could contain several different links rather than using the same one link. Also having external links would also help. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 04:42, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 Done I've used different references and added an external links section :) ( arky ) 23:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

List of California hurricanes[change source]

List of California hurricanes (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until October 16, 2007

While this article has a few lingering red links left, overall the article has the potential to warrant for the VGA tag. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 02:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Archived votings[change source]

Giant Panda[change source]

Result: not promoted (not enough votes)

Giant Panda (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Restarted. I will do my best to to fully respond, in a timely manner, to concerns raised. Maxim(talk) 21:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Support[change source]

  • Support - The article looks like VGA material to me. Pleanty of information, pictures, references, no red links and other websites. --Terry Talk - Changes 21:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose[change source]

  • Weak oppose I see nothing wrong with this article, however, even though it meets the size requirement, I would like to see a longer article for this page. I have changed this to weak oppose because of reasons given by Tygrrr. Cheers, Razorflame 14:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Just passed a RfGA and failed an RfVGA a week ago. I don't see that enough has changed since then to make it ready for VGA status. I don't think it's comprehensive just yet (criteria 2). I pointed out a few specific sections I would like to see expanded in my last vote that would give it better comprehensiveness that have not yet been touched. Also, doesn't pass criteria 7 (no redlinks). Seeing as how it doesn't meet all of the criteria, I don't see how I could support at this time. · Tygrrr... 15:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - I'll work on the comprehensiveness part, but I don't see a redlink? Can you give me the specific links, please? Maxim(talk) 18:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - Can you give me some pointers on the comprehensiveness part? What do you wish to be fattened up in the article? More sections? Some sections lacking? Thanks, Maxim(talk) 18:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - You're right, the redlinks have since been created but there are links to 3 pages on SE WKT that have yet to be created: wikt:territory, wikt:defend, wikt:mate. As far as comprehensiveness, I pointed out 3 things I would like to see fleshed out in my previous vote. Rather than re-type that for you, perhaps you could just check it out at the link I've posted above. Thanks. · Tygrrr... 19:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - OK, I didn't see it. :-) For the Spectacled Bear part, I don't see what else can be added; there's nothing elaborated on en.wiki, and I don't find anything useful in the sources. For the other two points, I've expanded on them. For the Cr.7 stuff, I'm going to try to add entries in wiktionary, although I've never edited any version... :-) Maxim(talk) 23:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - Added the entries. Maxim(talk) 19:17, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - Try a Google Search using the terms Spectacled Bear as the search term. Cheers, Razorflame 14:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - I'm very busy atm, but I'll make the necessary improvements by the weekend. Thanks, Maxim(talk) 01:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - I can't find anything useful, [1], on which to expand the articel but those sources are seem convincing. --Maxim(talk) 19:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - I haven't been able to find anything else to add to this article. Myabe it meets the comprehensiveness requirement now? I won't change my vote yet, though, until after I get a second opinion from Tygrrr or another other editor about this. Cheers, Razorflame 01:10, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - It's essentially based on the en.wiki article, but it doesn't go in so much detail as the other one does because of the target audience. Maxim(talk) 01:31, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose There should be a section of how the panda is used (diplomacy). Chenzw  Talk  01:17, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - There is, Giant_Panda#Giant_pandas_and_humans, third paragraph. Maxim(talk) 01:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment - Can it be made more comprehensive? It seems to be too short. Chenzw  Talk  01:28, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments[change source]

Giant Panda[change source]

Result: not promoted (4 sup/2 opp = 66% sup)

Giant Panda (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

It's more time-efficient for users to add comments for improvement in one section rather than drag it out. So I've listed the article here. This my first nom; article seems to meet all criteria. Maxim(talk) 00:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I have made a few changes to it; added two sections. Once it gets a separate Other websites section (Should not be too hard, copy a few of the better references from EnWP: External links) I think we are well on track. The most dangerous of the criteria now are #2 (Comprehensive), and #9 (no improvement templates) and #10 (Proper attribution - citations); I have added the claim that the closest relative is the Andean Bear, based on the EnWP article. I would prefer a citation there though. I have also left some comments on the talk page of the article, which is the proper forum for it.--Eptalon (talk) 08:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
I think the article provides a simple yet comprehensive introduction to the topic of Giant Panda, so #2 would be satisfied. #9 seems to be satisfied already, and as for #10, I've added plenty citations and checked facts throughly, so if there's some specific stuff an editor would wish to be cited, that's possible, too. Maxim(talk) 12:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
To Maxim: there are 2 sections for a specific reason. The voting section should not be used to make comments/suggestions for improvement. That is specifically what the discussion section is for. Also, articles can only be placed in the voting section once they meet all of the criteria. If not all the criteria are met, the article should be removed from the voting section and placed in the discussion section. While it is certainly valid to place an article immediately into the voting section as you have done, the discussion section serves an important prupose. If you would like comments and feedback, please place it there first. If not all the criteria are met, please place it there first. If you want no comments and a straight-up vote, which I don't really recommend, then you may place it here first. Bear in mind, however, that if an article is placed in the voting section prematurely (i.e. before all criteria are met), any votes made prematurely will not be counted. I hope this explanation helps you understand this process better. · Tygrrr... 14:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Support The article is well written (meaning it is comprehensive enough), there are no red links (minus that one in the infobox), it is 5,563 bytes body text (without pictures, infoboxes, interwikis, references, etc), it is extremely well referenced and it has no improvement templates on it. It also has more than 1 interwiki link and it has an other websites section. Apart from a few minor copyedits that I had to do, I see no reason why this should be denied VGA status. Razorflame 17:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
    • There's a redlink? I don't see it... :-/ Maxim(talk) 17:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
      • Haha, found it... :D (It was so small) Maxim(talk) 17:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Support I can now fully support the article; nevertheless, I might spend more time with improvements. --Eptalon (talk) 10:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Support - Well written, meets the criteria for VGAs.--Lights Deleted? 10:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Maybe a good article but not yet very good. There are a number of errors with continuity. Sometimes "Panda Bear" is used and sometimes "panda bear" is used. It is the same way at en:wiki and there has been a dicsussion about this issue over there but consensus has not been reached. However, I think one needs to be chosen and used throughout. Another continuity error is that sometimes kilograms and meters are used and sometimes pounds. I think they should be consistently listed using one system, with the conversion listed in parentheses. Another concern I have is regarding the maximum weight of giant pandas. We have listed here a max of 160 kg, yet en:wiki has a max of 115 kg. This is a large discrepancy so I would like to make sure that we are accurate. There are also some statements in the article that I would like to see expanded some, such as "The giant panda's closest ursine relative is the Spectacled Bear of South America", "Some people have called the Giant Panda a living fossil" and "Pandas sometimes run out of food, as a type of bamboo flowers, die, and regrow again at the same time". I feel that expansion of topics like these would lead to better comprehensiveness. I've also done some linking that leaves a few redlinks. You may also want to check that the links to Wiktionary have entries. I did not check before linking them. · Tygrrr... 15:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose weakly - Too short...but otherwise very good. And more photos are needed in my opinion.--04:41, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Support per User:Lights, I have also added a couple of new photos.--CPacker (talk) 06:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Pipe organ[change source]

Pipe organ (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

See above for reasons of being listed - Result: request withdrawn

Support[change source]

Oppose[change source]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Thamusemeantfan. Chenzw (talkchanges) 12:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per all above. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 17:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Oppose till we get more references (I guess I have a reference fetish :p). --Gwib -(talk)- 06:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments[change source]

This is currently a good article; if it fails the proposal it will remain one. --Eptalon (talk) 12:21, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Moulin Rouge![change source]

Moulin Rouge! (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on January 10, 2008 - moved to WP:PGA
  • Support IuseRosary (talk) 19:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Shouldn't you propose it first? And shouldn't we wait until we can actually continue? --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 08:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Creating a VGA now will only mean more work (as it also needs checking for the new criteria). What you could do however, is try to get it to Good article first; later upgrading to VGA should be easy. --Eptalon (talk) 11:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Fine : - ) I guess you're right IuseRosary (talk) 11:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Rings of Neptune[change source]

Rings of Neptune (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 17, 2007 - closed--votes not valid under new criteria

List of Neptune's moons[change source]

List of Neptune's moons (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 17, 2007 - closed--votes not valid under new criteria
  • Support // Lights // Bam! // 02:49, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, with special thanks to Lights for helping out with the redlinks:) --§ Snake311 (T + C) 03:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose As far as I understood lists should not be excepted as VGAs. I see that the article is more than a list, but no so much more and with this lemma it would be a bad example for a VGA. It's a fine article though. --Cethegus (talk) 06:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Rings of Neptune[change source]

Rings of Neptune (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 17, 2007 - closed--votes not valid under new criteria

Chris Thile[change source]

Chris Thile (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 15, 2007 - closed--votes not valid under new criteria

Tropical Storm Ingrid (2007)[change source]

Tropical Storm Ingrid (2007) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 15, 2007 - closed--votes not valid under new criteria
  • Support, --§ Snake311 (T + C) 06:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, though language in Storm history could vary a bit more (be less repetitive, use different verbs,...) --Eptalon 22:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support // Lights // Bam! // 23:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Tropical Storm Jerry (2007)[change source]

Tropical Storm Jerry (2007) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 15, 2007 - closed--votes not valid under new criteria
  • Support, --§ Snake311 (T + C) 06:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support // Lights // Bam! // 01:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. Note though, I made a few changes, mostly making sentences shorter. --Eptalon 02:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Tropical Storm Melissa (2007)[change source]

Tropical Storm Melissa (2007) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 15, 2007 - closed--votes not valid under new criteria
  • Support, --§ Snake311 (T + C) 06:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support // Lights // Bam! // 01:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Hurricane Karen (2007)[change source]

Hurricane Karen (2007) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 15, 2007 - closed--votes not valid under new criteria
  • Support, --§ Snake311 (T + C) 06:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support // Lights // Bam! // 01:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Meteorological history of Hurricane Katrina[change source]

Meteorological history of Hurricane Katrina (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 15, 2007 - closed--votes not valid under new criteria
  • Support, --§ Snake311 (T + C) 06:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support // Lights // Bam! // 01:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Goat Rock Beach[change source]

Goat Rock Beach (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 8, 2007 - 2 supports/3 opposes; failed.

*Weak Support This article, I do not think is long enough to be a VGA, but someone might prove me wrong about this. -Razorflame 03:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Muhammad[change source]

Muhammad (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 8, 2007 - 7 supports/1 oppose; passes.
  • Support, --§ Snake311 (T + C) 00:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, -- Thamusemeantfan 01:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • SupportLights (talk) 03:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support -Razorflame 03:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support JetLover Bam! 04:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - Huji reply 07:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - Barliner  talk  18:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose. I hate to do this, but I'm always alarmed when I'm far from the first person to vote and I find a number of basic mistakes [2] when I read over an article that is under discussion here. I'm afraid people aren't reading thoroughly before they vote. I actually studied the history of Islam for a semester (so I am far from knowing nothing about Muhammed) and found the article difficult to follow. Because of this, I don't feel this article is quite ready. · Tygrrr·talk· 19:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Tygrrr, because you have little knowledge about a subject dosen't necessarily mean you can oppose the article. We follow a certain criteria for VGAs here. Also, if you seem to find a mistake, its always right to fix it instead. For me, I have also studied Islam for a long time (including about Muhammad), and most of the information are accurate enough. Not to offend you or anything but just to let you know. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 00:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
What? I think you're mistaken. I didn't oppose the article because I don't know anything about the topic. I also never said the information wasn't accurate. I said that it was difficult to follow. More specifically, the way it was written is kind of confusing. An article can have plenty of good information but not be well-written. I think this is a good article. Just not very good yet. P.S. I was active in deciding on the criteria, so I think I know that they exist and what they are. Thanks. · Tygrrr·talk· 01:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Timpani[change source]

Timpani (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 8, 2007 - 6 supports/0 opposes; passes.

Buddhism[change source]

Buddhism (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 8, 2007 - 3 supports/3 opposes; failed.

*Support -Razorflame 03:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Oppose article has no sources, I think all VGA's should have some sources. Oysterguitarist 03:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I have added some sources to the article. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 05:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose -- Although some references are given in the end of the article, they are not cited correctly. For example, we can't say which senteces come from which refenrece, and this is not good. References should be cited using <ref> tags to be totally useful. - Huji reply 07:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose per Huji. -Razorflame (contributions) Talk 01:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Violin[change source]

Violin (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 4, 2007 4 supports/0 opposes; passes.
  • Support, --§ Snake311 (T + C) 00:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, -- Thamusemeantfan 03:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Support · Tygrrr·talk· 17:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, although it still can be (grammatically) simplified. - Huji reply 18:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Music[change source]

Music (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on November 30, 2007 4 supports/2 opposes; passes.
  • Support, --§ Snake311 (T + C) 22:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, -- Thamusemeantfan 01:40, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - Huji reply 10:46, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
    Changed to oppose. I neglected the fact that the areticle didn't cite any sources. Thanks to Oyster and Tygrrr for reminding us about it. - Huji reply 18:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
  • SupportLights (talk) 04:06, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak support articles has no sources. Oysterguitarist 16:23, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose. References/sources are a vital part of a VG article. · Tygrrr·talk· 18:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment[change source]

Sorry. I reverted the VGOOD status for this one, because I don't think there is consensus about it (3 supporters, 1 weak supporter, 2 opposers, does it mean consensus?) Others' comments are appreciated. - Huji reply 10:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I would say it's a VGOOD because weak support, however weak it is, is still support. Three people agree, and including the weak support 66% agree: the minimum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thamusemeantfan (talkcontribs)
I think a third person should also comment here. - Huji reply 11:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Currently, the minimum number to pass is a 66% (excluding neutral votes). Since it has 4 supports and 2 opposes, it barely passess the criteria. In my opnion, I'd say that the article passess since it got a 66% support before November 30. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 00:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Mali[change source]

Mali (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on December 1, 2007 - 5 supports/2 opposes; passes.
  • Strong support - Thamusemeantfan 02:16, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, well written - Huji reply 18:16, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
  • SupportLights (talk) 19:50, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose, too many redlinks. Also it isn't fair comparing the issue with my pervious nomination:( --§ Snake311 (T + C) 00:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - has multiple red links but is really well written :) ..--Cometstyles 00:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose. Good things: the sentences are short enough, the words are simple enough, the article has good overall length, important topics are covered. Bad things: "flow" of the article is kind of choppy, many redlinks in one section. I feel that given some more time and some more editing, the article may be ready some day soon. · Tygrrr·talk· 18:08, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak support - There are still a bit more than 20 redlinks that need to be fixed, before this can become a Very Good article. Otherwise it looks good tohugh. --Eptalon 12:51, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Nickel Creek[change source]

Nickel Creek (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting ends on November 30, 2007
  • Support, --§ Snake311 (T + C) 22:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong support, -- Thamusemeantfan 01:40, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • SupportLights (talk) 12:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose. I just went through the article and thought it was missing links to some important words. This added some redlinks. If these get made, I would support. Support. · Tygrrr·talk· 18:20, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
    Wish granted! - Huji reply 19:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
  • 100% Support: Pass -- Thamusemeantfan 01:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


4 Vesta[change source]

4 Vesta (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting possible until November 22, 2007
  • Support Thamusemeantfan 18:27, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The article still needs to get simplified. It uses many words which have simpler counterparts. - Huji reply 21:29, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Mumia Abu-Jamal[change source]

Mumia Abu-Jamal (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting possible until November 22, 2007

List of Arizona hurricanes[change source]

List of Arizona hurricanes (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Voting possible until November 22, 2007
  • Support Thamusemeantfan 18:29, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Support but I still think some words such as remnant and moisture should either be replaced with simpler words, or be linked to relevant articles on Wikipedia or Wiktionary. - Huji reply 21:31, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Endorphin[change source]

Endorphin (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until October 31, 2007

This article which was written by Huji, seemed to fit most of the criteria, so I moved it to the voting section with all the other nominees. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 01:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Support, --§ Snake311 (T + C) 01:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, for sure :) - Huji reply 03:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Neutral. After fixing some spelling errors, the article now appears ready grammatically and structurally. However, after I finished reading the article, I felt that I knew more about endorphins but also felt that the article left some things unexplained and I think the article could tell us a little more. I brought up one such issue on the article's talk page. · Tygrrr·talk· 13:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
That problem arises from the fact that --unlike what is expected from a VGA-- this article is mainly written by one editor (me). Contributions made by you (and others) can lead to a more detailed article about the topic. You can also check the English Wikipedia counterart, and propose sections to be imported from there. - Huji reply 13:46, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The Simpsons shorts[change source]

The Simpsons shorts (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until October 31, 2007

This article fairly looked finished from a quick scan, also that it fitted nearly all of the VGA criteria. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 01:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Support, --§ Snake311 (T + C) 01:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - I'm also looking for an approrpriate image to be added to the article (and be later used for the VGA abstract on the home page). - Huji reply 13:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I didn't even look at the page long and I found it to be very unsimple. "Marge and Homer say goodnight to their kids but all doesn't go to plan. Bart philosophically contemplates (first time and last) the wonders of the mind, Lisa hears Marge say "don't let the bed bugs bite" and fears that her bed bugs will eat her, and Maggie is traumatized by the lyrics of 'rock-a-bye-baby'"? The summaries need major simplification. This article is not ready to be shown off yet. · Tygrrr·talk· 13:22, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Neptune (planet)[change source]

Neptune (planet) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until October 31, 2007

The article's two-week period in the proposal section has been up, although no improvements were made into the article. But in case anyone wanted to vote in something, I moved it up to the voting section. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 01:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Oppose, specially because of lots of redlinks. - Huji reply 13:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Yes, too many redlinks remain for this article to be ready for display. · Tygrrr·talk· 13:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Mouthpiece (brass)[change source]

Mouthpiece (brass) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until October 19, 2007

I've throughly read the article and used the criteria to ckeck any mistakes. Fortunately, there was none so I moved it to the voting stage. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 01:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Support. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 01:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support ( arky ) 20:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - Hikitsurisan 17:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - - Huji reply 18:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Nineteen Eighty-Four[change source]

Nineteen Eighty-Four (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until October 14, 2007

Since its two-week period was up in the proposal section, I moved it here, in case anyone wanted to vote for this article. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 02:30, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment Looks great, and tons of references. My only very small critique is that the "Ending" section uses complicated English at times. However, since this is easily fixable, and by no means a reason to oppose such a good article, I support. Cheers, ( arky ) 00:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Very weak support. While it does seems to be a waste not to support an article that has been tirelessly worked on, the article would seem really shaky to warrant the VGA tag per WP:VGOOD. While I find it tough to support this article, at the same time, I can't find any reason to oppose it. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 03:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

List of California hurricanes[change source]

List of California hurricanes (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until October 11, 2007

Another article presented by me, I also moved this article to the voting section since it completes most of the criteria. No red-links left:) --§ Snake311 (T + C) 00:11, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Support, per nominator for the article. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 00:11, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - Huji reply 07:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support great article :) Cheers, ( arky ) 01:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support Oysterguitarist 15:40, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Homer Simpson[change source]

Homer Simpson (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Vote possible until October 9, 2007

I moved this article to the voting section since no one has cited any problems with the article. It fits nearly all of the criteria for a VGA. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 02:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Support, per nominator for the article. --§ Snake311 (T + C) 02:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - Huji reply 09:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Buzzer-beating support :) Great article, and tons of references. Nice work! ( arky ) 01:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)