Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia:Featured articles"
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
[[Featured articles. Past articles.]] '''2007/08''' | [[Featured articles. Past articles.]] '''2007/08''' | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
{{fa|Latino| | {{fa|Latino| | ||
Line 37: | Line 34: | ||
}} | }} | ||
+ | == Current article == | ||
+ | {{fa|Architecture| | ||
+ | :*AGree. [[User:TonyT|TonyT]] 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT) | ||
+ | :*<s>Disagree. Lead section is too short. Individual sections need to be better developed. [[User:Geo.plrd|Geoff Plourde]]<sup>[[User_talk:Geo.plrd|Complain!]]</sup> 21:44, 3 July 2008 (EDT)</s> Agree due to massive rewrite [[User:Geo.plrd|Geoff Plourde]]<sup>[[User_talk:Geo.plrd|Complain!]]</sup> 21:39, 21 October 2008 (EDT) | ||
+ | :*Disagree. It's coverage of the topic is too limited, briefly describing different architectural styles, but nothing more. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:16, 8 September 2008 (EDT) | ||
+ | :* Agree. It has been improved. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 20:33, 16 October 2008 (EDT) | ||
+ | :* Still disagree, but... It still covers almost nothing except architectural styles. The description of architecture itself is limited to the first two sentences plus a further sentence quoting a dictionary definition. There's nothing about the goals of architecture, the methods that architects use, the profession of architecture, etc. If this article was moved to [[Architectural styles]], ''then'' perhaps it would be good enough to qualify. But for its current title, its coverage is still far too limited. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:49, 17 October 2008 (EDT) Done. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 11:02, 18 October 2008 (EDT) | ||
+ | :* Agree. --[[User:DeanS|DeanS<sup>talk</sup>]] 14:01, 19 October 2008 (EDT) | ||
+ | :* Disagree, per what Philip J. Rayment said. Anyone have anything about the actual origin of the term, or even the history of architecture? [[User:JY23|JY23]] 10:16, 24 October 2008 (EDT) | ||
+ | }} | ||
== Future articles == | == Future articles == | ||
Line 73: | Line 80: | ||
}} | }} | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | ||
{{fa|Great Flood| | {{fa|Great Flood| | ||
:* Agree, although the missing sections under ''Effects of the Flood'' should be filled in or removed. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:14, 8 September 2008 (EDT) | :* Agree, although the missing sections under ''Effects of the Flood'' should be filled in or removed. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:14, 8 September 2008 (EDT) |
Revision as of 13:00, October 26, 2008
Featured articles
The Featured articles are posted on the Main Page each week. 35 articles have been featured to date. Articles may be submitted to the list of featured articles by listing them on this page. Please add them to the end of the list. Articles will normally be featured in the order listed, but the order may be changed by the committee in some cases.
Articles listed here will be considered for featuring by the committee. However, any editor may offer their own comments and are welcome to help improved listed articles.
Contents
Past articles
Featured articles. Past articles. 2007/08
|
Current article
|
Future articles
The following articles should be checked for any improvements that can be made before they are posted to the Main Page.
Proposed for featuring
The following articles will probably be moved to the list above in the order listed if nobody has any objection or alternative suggestion.
New suggestions can be added at the end of this list.
|
|
|
|
|
- Agree, been on the "Most Viewed Articles" list for a while now, but someone needs to work on the red links. JY23 20:39, 19 September 2008 (EDT)
|
|
|
|
|
Past Nominations
The following articles were proposed and determined not to be suitable for featuring. If the article has been improved to the point where it is of sufficient quality to be featured, move it back to Proposed for Featuring. Click the show link after each entry to see why it was rejected.
|
|
|
|
|