Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia:Featured articles"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Proposed for featuring)
(Proposed for featuring: voted)
Line 202: Line 202:
 
: * Agree. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 10:59, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
 
: * Agree. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 10:59, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
 
: * Agree. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 12:55, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
 
: * Agree. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 12:55, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
 +
: * Disagree. Too many red links. --[[User:DeanS|DeanS<sup>talk</sup>]] 15:57, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
 
}}
 
}}
  

Revision as of 14:57, 5 June 2009

Featured articles

Committee members

The Featured articles are posted on the Main Page each week.

Articles may be submitted to the list of featured articles by listing them on the talk 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 and voted on by the committee members. Editors may offer their own comments (on the talk page) and are welcome to help improve the listed articles!


Past articles

Featured articles. Past articles. 2007/08

because of his 200 years anniversary.

Current article

* Agree. --₮K/Admin/Talk 14:07, 2 April 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --DeanStalk 09:55, 7 April 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. Now that it has one of my favorite crosses. --Foxtrot 06:43, 8 April 2009 (EDT)
* Disagree. List of crosses is incomplete. Geoff PlourdeComplain! 20:10, 19 April 2009 (EDT)
* Disagree. It is lacking any explanation of how the various crosses came about, or their history (for e.g. why the Cross of Lorainne has two beams). Also, what about things like the Cross of St. Andrew? --KotomiTnandeyanen? 03:30, 20 April 2009 (EDT) Improved. --Joaquín Martínez 09:54, 26 April 2009 (EDT)
* Disgree. needs deeper history; artwork is ok but more is needed, & it should be dated and related to schools of art. --RJJensen 03:51, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --Jpatt 9:15, 25 May 2009 (EDT)

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. --Joaquín Martínez 08:34, 24 May 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --DeanStalk 12:17, 24 May 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --₮K/Admin/Talk 15:10, 24 May 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --Jpatt 9:15, 25 May 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --Joaquín Martínez 08:34, 24 May 2009 (EDT)
* Agree --RJJensen 09:30, 24 May 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --DeanStalk 12:17, 24 May 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --₮K/Admin/Talk 15:10, 24 May 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --Jpatt 9:15, 25 May 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --₮K/Admin/Talk 15:10, 24 May 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --Jpatt 9:15, 25 May 2009 (EDT)
* Disagree. Too many red links. --DeanStalk 13:01, 25 May 2009 (EDT)
* Disagree. Too many red links; too much summary of plot and too little critical analysis. --RJJensen 14:06, 25 May 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --Jpatt 10:59, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
* Agree. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 12:55, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
* Disagree. Too many red links. --DeanStalk 15:57, 5 June 2009 (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.

Conservapedia:Featured articles/Past Nominations 08-09