Wikipedia:Version 0.5 FA Review

This page is designed to facilitate the nomination and review process of Featured Articles (FAs) for Wikipedia:Version 0.5 (V0.5), the test CD release designed to pave the way for Wikipedia:Version 1.0. Reviewers from the review team are encouraged to sign up for subject sections that interest them. It is also possible to share responsibility for a section in order to split up the workload. Reviewers first check which article have already been passed. Then they will aim to review all FAs within their area of interest by August 31, 2006. This will allow FAs to bypass the general V0.5 nomination page going straight from this page to the main Version 0.5 page once approved.

[edit] Criteria

The criteria for importance and quality apply, but the group has (after much heated discussion agreed on this consensus view for FAs:

• They should nearly all pass on quality, only failing on quality in exceptional circumstances - where we find one that is well below our modern standards.
• The vast majority of FAs should also be allowed to pass on importance, only being rejected in cases of very low importance (like Spoo) with the agreement of three reviewers signing #Importance review.

[edit] Reviewer sign-up

Please sign your name up if you are going to work on a section - please aim to complete the section by August 31.

Now it is August 31, please sign up for any sections that still need work, and aim to complete them by September 30. We will probably end all reviewing on September 30 (yet to be agreed).

Please remove a section and its entry if it has been completely reviewed.

Language and linguistics NEEDS REVIEWING IN SEPTEMBER

• Eyu100^{(t|fr|Version 1.0 Editorial Team)} 17:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Law NEEDS REVIEWING IN SEPTEMBER

Mathematics NEEDS REVIEWING IN SEPTEMBER

Media NEEDS REVIEWING IN SEPTEMBER

• Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 20:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Zzzzz 22:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Music STILL NEEDS REVIEWING IN SEPTEMBER

• Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 20:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Zzzzz 22:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
• Walkerma 21:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Philosophy NEEDS REVIEWING IN SEPTEMBER

Physics and astronomy Mainly done.

• Titoxd^(?!?) 05:05, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• NCurse
• Runningonbrains 04:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Politics and government STILL NEEDS REVIEWING IN SEPTEMBER Walkerma 21:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Royalty, nobility, and heraldry STILL NEEDS REVIEWING IN SEPTEMBER

Sport and games Partly done, still NEEDS WORK

• Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 20:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Zzzzz 22:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
• Nifboy 06:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Runningonbrains 01:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Transport STILL NEEDS REVIEWING IN SEPTEMBER

War ALMOST COMPLETE: Thanks Kirill!

• Kirill Lokshin 15:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Purge page cache

[edit] Review process

• Reviews should only be done by members of the review team (if you want to help sign up here).
• Reviewers then pick an area of interest to them and sign up there.
• The reviewer should not have been a significant contributor to the article under review.

As time allows, each reviewer will check articles on their list based on the criteria above. With most articles expected to pass, this should be a relatively straightforward review process, easy to complete by August 31 2006. Note that an article should only be removed from the list if it loses its FA status. After an article has been reviewed, the following process is carried out:

[edit] Pass

1. "Strikeout" the article name on this page, using <s> and </s>.
2. Place the {{V0.5|class=XX|category=YY}} template on its talk page. See {{V0.5}} for details of classes and categories.
3. List the article on Wikipedia:Version 0.5 under the appropriate section.

[edit] Fail on importance only

If the article is of acceptable quality, but on a topic outside the scope of the V0.5 release:

1. Leave a comment next to the article name on this page
2. Leave a comment below in the importance review section.
3. After a total of three reviewers (including yourself) agree and sign that the article should not be included, strikeout the article name, using <s> and </s> and leave a comment such as "scope" or "importance".
4. If consensus is not reached in the importance review section, and one reviewer believes strongly that this article should be included, then the article should be passed for Version 0.5 (see above).
5. Articles that fail on importance are listed here Wikipedia:Version 0.5 FA Review/Archived nominations.

[edit] Fail on quality

If the article fails to meet the criteria because of quality issues:

1. Consider requesting a cleanup of the article using cleanup tags or requests on the talk page.
2. Consider nominating the article for WP:FARC.
3. Consider a clear reason on the article's talk page.
4. "Strikeout" the article name on this page, using <s> and </s>, and place a comment next to the article name indicating briefly why the article failed, and any action taken.