User:Lincher/Good article establishment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an essay; it contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. It is not a policy or guideline, and editors are not obliged to follow it.

This page is intended to stir discussion on a controversial subject that is good articles. The current proposal is to promote the idea that the good articles process is as much a step in the article creation as featured articles currently are.

[edit] Outcome of proposal

• Adopt Good articles as a level of quality in the article's progression. (See assessment scale for an example).
• Define the level of quality GA should be. It now has almost the same criterias as the FA but being less strict (For an example, see the citation criteria).
• Define the progression stages of an article Start->GA->PR->FA or Start->PR->GA->FA or Start->GA=PR->FA.

  See GA to become a real step in article progression

  See Wikipedia_talk:Good_articles#Finding_a_good_article-_too_hard

  See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#"Articles too short to become Featured Articles can become Good Articles"

  See Good Article Drive and other suggestions.

• Adopt, if possible to have a consensus on the subject, the plus sign banner in the right most corner of the article copying the FA article.
• Decide if downgraded FA articles or articles that fail FAC will be brought back to GA status.
• Are long articles to be assessed by people assessing the GA nominees.

[edit] Good article use

• It can serve as a review of articles when people failing give sufficient reasons.
• It can serve as a second peer review.
• It can be the outline of an article that will become a featured article.
• It can be seen as work complying to all of wikipedias policies when people see the plus sign in the corner.

[edit] Good article criticism

• People don't see GAs in a good light.
• People don't like the GA plus sign in the right most corner because it was an undiscussed idea, votes resulted in revoking the idea.

  See GA dispute #1 which resulted in a deletion

  GA Deletion review[1] resulted in an Endorse closure.

• The project is not well-known or appreciated.