Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia:Featured articles"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Add opinions of two proposals, reinstate paragraph to rightful position, and fix display problem)
(Move 'deconstruction' out of 'future articles' list as there is no consensus.)
Line 95: Line 95:
  
 
The following articles should be checked for any improvements that can be made before they are posted to the Main Page.
 
The following articles should be checked for any improvements that can be made before they are posted to the Main Page.
 
{{fa|Deconstruction|
 
:*Disagree. Unimportant topic of interest mostly to liberals. [[User:TonyT|TonyT]] 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
 
:*Disagree. Important topic, but not described correctly. Article contains at least one contradiction ("reader response" both wrong and right). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 16:40, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 
:*Agree. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 09:14, 26 August 2008 (EDT)
 
:*Disagree. I'm not qualified to judge it's accuracy, but it is too obscure and not written at a suitable level.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:24, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
 
}}
 
  
 
{{fa|Kamakura|2=
 
{{fa|Kamakura|2=
Line 115: Line 108:
  
 
New suggestions can be added at the ''end'' of this list.
 
New suggestions can be added at the ''end'' of this list.
 +
 +
{{fa|Deconstruction|
 +
:*Disagree. Unimportant topic of interest mostly to liberals. [[User:TonyT|TonyT]] 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
:*Disagree. Important topic, but not described correctly. Article contains at least one contradiction ("reader response" both wrong and right). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 16:40, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 +
:*Agree. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 09:14, 26 August 2008 (EDT)
 +
:*Disagree. I'm not qualified to judge it's accuracy, but it is too obscure and not written at a suitable level.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:24, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
 +
}}
  
 
{{fa|Johns Hopkins University|
 
{{fa|Johns Hopkins University|

Revision as of 14:25, September 7, 2008

Featured articles

Committee members

The Featured articles are posted on the Main Page each week. 31 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.

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.

Has been improved by JessicaT in August 2008.

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.

  • Disagree. Unimportant topic of interest mostly to liberals. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree. Important topic, but not described correctly. Article contains at least one contradiction ("reader response" both wrong and right). --Ed Poor Talk 16:40, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 09:14, 26 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree. I'm not qualified to judge it's accuracy, but it is too obscure and not written at a suitable level. Philip J. Rayment 10:24, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree. Too short. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree. Underdeveloped. Foxtrot 22:01, 14 July 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree Unfortunately this article is far too short to feature at this time. Geoff PlourdeComplain! 19:35, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

(too many red links)

  • Disagree. Too short. Too many red links. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree. Too short. Too many red links. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree. Too short; a good start but needs more info; too many red links. Taj 21:21, 14 July 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree. Unimportant topic and drug influenced album. This isn't Wikipedia. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
  • AGree. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree. Lead section is too short. Individual sections need to be better developed. Geoff PlourdeComplain! 21:44, 3 July 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree. Many better American topics than this. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree. It's something different (think of it as chess on steroids), but I'm biased --JessicaTOhayo gozaimasu! 16:23, 1 July 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree. Found this very interesting and informative. I think others would too. Taj 14:46, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree. Too short. Too many red links. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
  • Disagree. No references despite questionable statements and too many red links. I don't think the length is a problem. Philip J. Rayment
  • Agree. Taj 22:36, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree. Taj 22:36, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
  • As his VP spot remains an ongoing media topic among major news networks, I feel that Conservapedia can gain big readership by bringing him into discussion. CTrooper 20:40, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Agree --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 13:07, 17 August 2008 (EDT)