m (Appropedia:Good Articles moved to Appropedia:Good Pages: broader content type - projects as well as articles (articles sounds like they're about topics)) |
(using template, not listing nominations;criteria) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Good pages''' are pages which are considered to be of good quality but which are not yet, or are unlikely to reach [[Appropedia:FA|featured article]] quality. | |||
It is a way of tracking and improving pages to a point where they can become highlighted content, as well as improving the standard of content on Appropedia. | |||
==Wikipedia's model == | |||
This is a suggestion based on [[Wikipedia:Project:Good articles]]. | |||
The Wikipedia page states the following (and it will probably apply here, with minor changes): | The Wikipedia page states the following (and it will probably apply here, with minor changes): | ||
:'''Good articles''' are articles which are considered to be of good quality but which are not yet, or are unlikely to reach [[WP:FA|featured article]] quality. Good articles should meet the [[Wikipedia:Good article criteria|good article criteria]] and have passed through the [[Wikipedia:Good article nominations|good article nomination process]] successfully. In short, they should be well written, factually accurate and [[WP:V|verifiable]], broad in coverage, [[WP:NPOV|neutral in point of view]], stable, and illustrated, where possible, by relevant [[Wikipedia:Images|images]] with suitable [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags|copyright licenses]]. Good articles need not be as comprehensive as featured articles, but they should not omit any major facets of the topic: a [[Wikipedia:Compare Criteria Good v. Featured|comparison]] of the criteria for good and featured articles describes further differences. | :'''Good articles''' are articles which are considered to be of good quality but which are not yet, or are unlikely to reach [[WP:FA|featured article]] quality. Good articles should meet the [[Wikipedia:Good article criteria|good article criteria]] and have passed through the [[Wikipedia:Good article nominations|good article nomination process]] successfully. In short, they should be well written, factually accurate and [[WP:V|verifiable]], broad in coverage, [[WP:NPOV|neutral in point of view]], stable, and illustrated, where possible, by relevant [[Wikipedia:Images|images]] with suitable [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags|copyright licenses]]. Good articles need not be as comprehensive as featured articles, but they should not omit any major facets of the topic: a [[Wikipedia:Compare Criteria Good v. Featured|comparison]] of the criteria for good and featured articles describes further differences. | ||
For now, we can do all this on one page. | For now, we can do all this on one page. | ||
== Criteria == | |||
An initial suggestion for criteria is: | |||
* Tidy - no major unfinished or confusing sections. | |||
* Useful - some relevance, great or small, to improving the world. | |||
* Layout - uses [[Appropedia:Page sections|sections]] appropriately, so it is easy for any reader to understand the purpose of each section. | |||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
| Line 11: | Line 22: | ||
= Nominations = | = Nominations = | ||
Place the template {{tl|good pages}} at the bottom of the page. At this stage anyone may | |||
[[Category:Highlighted content]] | |||
Revision as of 18:28, 31 October 2008
Good pages are pages which are considered to be of good quality but which are not yet, or are unlikely to reach featured article quality.
It is a way of tracking and improving pages to a point where they can become highlighted content, as well as improving the standard of content on Appropedia.
Wikipedia's model
This is a suggestion based on Wikipedia:Project:Good articles. The Wikipedia page states the following (and it will probably apply here, with minor changes):
- Good articles are articles which are considered to be of good quality but which are not yet, or are unlikely to reach featured article quality. Good articles should meet the good article criteria and have passed through the good article nomination process successfully. In short, they should be well written, factually accurate and verifiable, broad in coverage, neutral in point of view, stable, and illustrated, where possible, by relevant images with suitable copyright licenses. Good articles need not be as comprehensive as featured articles, but they should not omit any major facets of the topic: a comparison of the criteria for good and featured articles describes further differences.
For now, we can do all this on one page.
Criteria
An initial suggestion for criteria is:
- Tidy - no major unfinished or confusing sections.
- Useful - some relevance, great or small, to improving the world.
- Layout - uses sections appropriately, so it is easy for any reader to understand the purpose of each section.
See also
Nominations
Place the template {{good pages}} at the bottom of the page. At this stage anyone may